According to the Game Director of Overwatch, some players are far too biased when it comes to nerfs and buffs.
Hardly any player welcomes it when their favorite hero in Overwatch falls victim to the nerf bat and emerges from a patch as the “loser” of the changes. In the official forums of Blizzard’s hero shooter, there have been complaints in recent days – as with previous patches – about this. “Why is Roadhog being buffed and nerfed at the same time? Why is Bastion being changed so drastically?”
Jeff Kaplan has spoken up this time and explained some things about the philosophy behind buffs and nerfs.
“Many players seem to see things in a binary or black/white way. For example, heroes either need a buff or a nerf. Players view themselves either as the affected hero or as the victim of that hero [but rarely as both at the same time]. (…)”
“While it is normal to have a ‘main’ hero (although this is somewhat critical in a team-based game with constant switching opportunities and the permanent adjustment of team composition), the cries for nerfs and buffs from ‘main’ players are often quite flawed. When ‘mains’ of a certain hero call for nerfs for another hero, they are often not satisfied until that other hero is practically unplayable.”
Too often, players fail to recognize both sides of an adjustment, causing them to automatically fall into a “protective stance” when nerfs are announced, deeming any justification null and void.
“We try to be as objective, careful, and thorough as possible when it comes to hero balance. We don’t just think, ‘Hero X needs a buff or Hero Y needs a nerf.’ Heroes sometimes just need to be adjusted… and this can mean a mix of changes where some things go up and others go down. (…)
“We try to represent the players of a hero just as much as the victims of that hero. In a perfect world, you should technically be both…”
You can find Kaplan’s complete forum post in our sources.
Has Blizzard changed the drop rates of loot boxes? Many fans suspect it.
