Hello forum people. Once again as I reminded some of you in the past way up in the thread, please try to keep your comments civil. I am directing this at no one in particular.
Please keep it game-related and try to avoid politics which will only inflame the issue along unnecessary lines.
It’s likely that this thread is only still here because of the blue post and that it’s blue-tracked. This thread has the only CM response here I’ve seen on the issue which probably means it’s been used by CMs to show a response has been made.
Given they’ve deleted so many threads like it (a claim made by several posters), this thread might have been deleted a long time ago were it not for the reasons above.
Also, anyone claiming any kind of statistical high ground with statistically insignificant numbers from various sources doesn’t understand formal statistics.
MrLlama’s poll of ~2300 people showed that 54% did not like the face. Only 33% liked the face:
Does that mean anything? Not really, his viewers don’t like the face. Does a poll on Le Reddit mean anything? Not really, it just means those particular people seeing that particular poll voted in that way.
In other words, to make a valid statistical inference about the overall D2R player population, you must follow a formal survey methodology. This was not done in any survey to date.
So I’m not jumping on anyone in particular here - but what I am saying is that people that usually have rational well-reasoned comments are not doing so in this thread.
I would also caution people about continuing to mention alt accounts - it just gives others an idea they might not have had before 
In my mind after catching up with all of this, this is the gist of the debate, and please don’t report me for stating the obvious.
This seems to be why the changes were made and this statement is the one that any rational company’s PR dept would have made in conjunction with the changes:
"In order to better represent today’s growing and diverse international playerbase, we’ve made some changes to D2R’s character models. We feel these changes outweigh the need for authenticity to the original D2 models and we hope our players understand our desire for more inclusivity. "
So that’s one side of the argument.
This is the other side of the argument:
“The game is no longer authentic. The speaking dialogue does not match up with the character’s looks anymore. Doing this on a remaster makes no sense when other games offer appearance options. The game is gender-locked and skin-locked such that players have no options when there should be options - why is this. The Amazon look and feel is off. The character I played for decades is now gone. All this sort of thing which are actually very reasonable arguments.”
So I will tell you guys this - a 1000ml glass filled with 500ml water can be both half full and half empty.
Both sides can be right at the same time. I know this is hard for some of you to see but it’s true that more people should feel comfortable playing D2 hence more diversity can be a good thing for new players.
And it’s also true that it’s an absolute shock to the system to see the original D2 characters changed. As “art”, I am completely against changing D2 characters for reasons outside of “art” and “lore”. Should we change the Mona Lisa in the Louvre to have a mustache to make some kind of statement. Of course not. Should we censor artists if they want to do things in a certain way and force them to use “inclusive” notions? Of course not, because this is when we stray into authoritarian regimes, all of which don’t end well historically. So I personally think changes to characters for reasons that aren’t artistic is therefore agenda-driven which is therefore a dangerous precedent. If this was a new game, fine, no problems, but it’s not. It’s an icon.
So I see both sides and they can both be true. Perhaps some of you might want to tone it down a notch though.