What is the main demographic for D2R?

Title. I feel a little lost in what’s the real target for that version of D2.

For the younglings that were born post 2000, do you feel represented by 40-60 year olds?

And for the veterans that feel represented by characters of the same age, does that mean that the new spiderman is too young and we should get a 60 year old peter parker like he is in the “new” comics?

personally i don’t feel the changes in the characters make me feel more “represented” but instead remind me of how old i actually am.

am i missing a point here? or there’s some hidden detail about young people yearning for old characters to feel represented this days im not aware of.

im sure there’s a real reason for making the characters so old, it’s just that i don’t feel like it has a purpose, on the contrary, i feel like if those seven guys are the best hope of humanity, sanctuary is lost. they don’t look “tuff” they look sadly depressed, like they went to tristram to die by a suicidal thought more than searching for an heroic feat.

for that weird guy that is thinking “you’re not a character artist, you don’t own pixar” (i’ve met thousands of those guys in facebook and youtube, i don’t know how many lurk blizzard’s forums), yes, i am a character artist. and i’ve been for 25+ years (i don’t own pixar, tho), and changing those faces would take me 20-40 minutes if i had the files.

im not thinking about the technical difficulties for not changing them, but the design choices behind those changes in the first place.



Considering the 30 up crowd is the ones pushing the current rabid consumption of nostalgia products. It cant be for anyone else.

The character models look like ideology from current social theory trends (representation + tribe theory).

It could also be seen as slight mockery. Cause the target group is older, and does want this game. A subtext of ‘this is you’.

1 Like

i don’t think we (the allegedly targeted audience) would “rabid-consume” nostalgia products if there weren’t so many “woke-forced” franchises nowdays. Like mortal kombat 9 and mkx having ultra skimpy outfits and then mk11 being pretty conservative on their outfits and forcing two already established characters as cannonically gay in the same iteration.

so, the point i’m missing is “you should be feel represented by old people because you’re old yourself” ?? because in all that inclusion i feel pretty excluded being “me, a boomer” the target for the product.

what about everything else? i mean gal gadot’s wonderwoman is pretty popular, and i don’t imagine an old man in his 60s representing the peak of physical prowess as captain america or superman.

social theory states “boomers suck” by making “boomer age characters” for “boomer age games”? does that mean the next diablo 1 remake will have a Wirt at his mid 50s? and we get to play as three dead guys? how about cain? will he be 140 years old? how does that work for continuity reasons? will diablo 3 remake feature an undead barbarian too?

i don’t think old people draw/model/sculpt old superheroes without a narrative reason.

when someone says “draw a super hero” you don’t go “oh im old, fat, ugly and im not good at math, ill draw an old fat ugly superhero that is bad at math” you go “this guy is at his/her/hoe/hme/hwp prime, it represents the peak of everything i am and he’s even has a math PhD”.

what i mean, there’s nothing wrong with old characters, i loved diablo 3 barbarian, but making all seven classes old just because the game was first launched 20 yearsago is (for me) pretty stupid. if we were getting “older” voiceovers and adjustments such as “young sorceress” being changed to “fellow middle aged person” i would be actually fun, but there’s a huge disconnection between amazon’s new woke face and her original voiceover.

and that’s my main grief. Charsi sounds young. Amazon sounds young. Sorceress sounds young. Hell, even D3 barbarian sounds younger than D2R looks.

at least the panther woman redesign seemingly obeys actual anatomy studies and looks pretty realistic compared to the original’s huge breasts, i can totally understand the change and as a character artist i can totally get back that artistic choice.

but aging all seven classes just because? still nope

1 Like

In the end, representation theory aside. Does it matter at all?

In an ARGP you generally do not look at your ‘avatar’ during gameplay, you look at everywhere but at them. In the interplay of gameplay and avatar appearance, especially in this genre; being mostly gameplay orientated, its truly minor.

For me the avatar could look like a Navy Bean plush toy. Its not why I play this type of game.

1 Like

“In the end, representation theory aside. Does it matter at all?” well, yes. Because the demographic is not being represented at all. For me, it matters mostly because it represents how player feedback is handled. And if i don’t see a single blue comment since february, it doesn’t say “we care what players think” but the exact opposite.

i dont want a “yes, you’re right” but a “we aged the characters because cannonically the word young means old in the sightless eye dictionary” and i’d be like, oh, i didn’t knew that.

“In an ARGP you generally do not look at your ‘avatar’ during gameplay” well, 90% of arpgs that offer character customzation, i generally look at my avatar. each time i change my equipment, each time there’s a cinematics, i don’t know if you have played diablo 3, but the inventory screen shows your character and pause screen on consoles is exactly your character looking at the camera, so speaking of diablo as a franchise, yes, you do look at your character pretty often, the character is even present all the time on screen, so maybe you look at the numbers or the experience bar, but i “generally” looks at my characters in arpgs. all of them. some people even spends a few hours creating their characters.

it’d come as a surprise but speaking of diablo, in diablo 4 there will be character customization. not for people that looks at experience bars, but for people like me that like to play with a character that hey like.

it sounds weird, but some people enjoy games, and like stories driven by how much they like their characters. i know some people only care about being first on ladders or getting x item, i mostly play for fun. im not sure but i think that’s the purpose of a game, well, in my time, it will come as a surprise, but, games were meant to be fun, more than being a work or as a basis for job credentials.

and part of the fun was liking the main character. as a character. not just as a mannequin that shows your best item. but maybe im no longr the demographic, i like playing diablo, diablo2 and diablo 3 since launch and i plan playing diablo 4 but maybe i’m no longer the demographic. and i should accept a character-class driven game is no longer driven by the character, but by the items you farm for.

i honestly liked the 90s better. and ill keep my rabid consumption of nostalgia products if they mean “having fun”, and worst if the alternative is forced woke + spend my fun hours farming.

The game characters are not meant to represent us.

But yeah, D2R is surely targeted first and foremost at the old D2 players.
Although I could see younger people jumping in too.

“The game characters are not meant to represent us.”
That’s my point. If i played this 20 years ago i want the characters to look like they did 20 years ago (young, inexperienced and at peak physical form) and thus make me feel like the game made me feel 20 years ago.

if i wanted a game to remember me how old i am, i could as well play “ISR controversy form” instead of the remake.

i think the point of them being young is that they have the potential but they lack experience, thus the “GAIN EXP” leveling system. and it works because they al start with the most basic ability and then they learn the rest or upgrade their knowledge of the skill.

OR. if they are indeed 20 years older, 20 years of being tired, and 20 years of experience then i think they should all start at lv 99 with matching gear and thus represent those 20 years of grinding.

at least.


I think the demographic is everyone pretty much except for D2 players that are past casual fans. The “D3 players”, nostalgia causuals, and the young crowd is the main demographic. They don’t care about the 30 somethings that still play D2.

They lost me cause they can’t stay true to D2, not paying for a downgrade. Bot free or no benefit to buying D2R.

and that’s sad because it could’ve been the perfect D2 experience.

what bothers me the most is that these changes are made to please a vocal minority that won’t even buy the game, hence the question.

from my point of view, i can’t understand why it’s worth to lose 20% playerbase to gain 0.4% woke consumers. public relationships? secret founding from woke organisms?

IDK, but if i don’t see a blue post concerning the player feedback by august, ill ask for a refound and won’t buy anything activision/blizzard related.

not because i don’t like the depressed faces, but because the last post was from february and it just means “we saw the posts, didn’t care enough to even reply”


If I saw some feedback it would make me much more inclined to preorder. As it is now I just think almost all of the D2 characters are more appealing to play, I look at the characters the entire time I play. The assassin in particular looks bad, her looks and animations are just half as visually appealing to me.

If this character art is all I get in D2R then I’m not interested. Auto gold and shared stash is a horizontal change, hardly worth buying a new game for. If there is quality I don’t mind paying for more accounts and mules, but I’m not even interested cause D2 looks better.

Before D3 was launched I remember they ignored everybody who complained about the easy level cap later to introduce paragon to save the game. This is the same type of colossal blunder where they ignore their fanbase again but this time there are no band aids and they can’t ride D2’s coattails anymore.

1 Like

and the auction house. and the “online only” aspect of playing alone.
but blizzard was in a better place back then, nowdays diablo 4 is too far away to fail D2R at launch, (mostly because reforged already failed) so that’s part of my concern, if D2R fails, diablo 4 launch day would be their “dead or alive” moment and if they keep their woke agenda, let’s see if woke gamers save the company after their actual fanbase goes away. And i happen to love the Diablo franchise enough for not wanting that to happen either way.

You are arguing for a character that is acceptable to your bias. Since its a re-release. Why would the static character model be something that can appeal to everyone? WOuld everyone find appeal in a 20 something Victoria’s Secret model? Rationally they should be older, as a symbol of their ability to survive, their power and skill.

ARG’s were always about the stat sheet and the graphical assets are there to carry the spreadsheet and twitch, or planned gameplay.

Hades recently highlighted that an ARPG can also be viewed as a time/grind game, not about story, not about spreadsheets, not about preparation. About grind.

I stated what I thought about why the models are, as they are.

It is endless if we wallow in self gratifying whining about change. There is nothing that can please everyone.

Why would the static character model be something that appeals to a small minority while virtually everyone who is part of the original fanbase disagrees? i’ve seen four different people defending the models, while 72% of online articles about D2R are about character faces, i’m not “biased”, im using google search results as my own basis. just google D2R and (at least for me, in a clean browser without cookies) 7 out of 10 are character faces, two about the release date, and one that thinks the remake was a christmas miracle.

but let’s say my search reults are biased, im not even arguing about a character being acceptable for my bias, im sayig DESIGN-WISE there isn’t a lore based reason to age the characters I AM A CHARACTER ARTIST, so i’m never biased about character design choices, i’m just asking what is the reason behing aging the characters.

it’s a question i’d immediately make if i was the lead artist of D2R. which i’m not. THAT’s WHY I’M ASKING.

for you, maybe. At launch, D2 didn’t had any stat sheet, twitch didn’t exist, hell, i don’t even think yahoo! was a thing back then. i’ve never EVER played a single game that needed spreadsheets to play (or to have fun for that matter), and i’ve played literally tens of thousands of games from start to finish for more than 40 years.

now, if ARPGS aren’t about story, what’s the point in including lore and story? it’s like saying competitive multiplayer is the future and story driven single player games are dead. then you see 60% of recent steam games are strictly singleplayer, most of them, story driven.

honestly, i’m interested in what diablo experts think a pitch for a perfect gameplay style should sound like. sounds like “excel masters” or “competitive grinding”? because i’m not buying that with the ammount of lore that exists in D2. if D2 was about spreadsheets what’s the point in the remake?

Seriously, between the stance about faces and the “real” way to play D2 i’m not even sure i’ve been playing the same game for the last 20 years.

I think what matters the most is to maintain the art consistent, than to give eye candy for everyone. I don’t like some of the D2R models, but I think they fit the overal theme. It’s a bizarre, almost “horror-like” world. People aren’t gonna be dolls there, especially battle hardened heroes. The amazon isn’t eye candy, I agree, but she looks like an amazon, in fact, her new outfit is more reminiscent of greek warrior attires, or at the very least, of the interpretation of such warriors commonly seen in fantasy. So I can’t contest that.

1 Like

It’s not a new world, we already know the world and its inhabitants. New worlds are for new games. I can turn on D2 right now and see that all of the women that inhabit D2 are pretty just like they are in Overwatch. Not buying.

Stay faithful to D2 or deliver some other big features.

My point is, they’re not battle hardened heroes, they start at level 1. Have they been more experienced they should start at a higher level or the EXP system has no real meaning lorewise.

like i’ve said, if they’ll have 20 years of experience and sadness, they should start at lv99 with matching gear, as if i’ve myself have been griding for gear the last 20 years and im old and tired and had enough of wokeism.

you know who else is an amazon? wonderwoman. and it’s played by a battle hardened woman in her mid 30s called Gal Gadot and she’s a thousand times more pleasant to the eyes than the man-azon without losing her beauty appeal.

replacing the (originally young) amazon with an old version of herself just because

is like replacing gal gadot with machete in snyder’s cut because it’s more accurate. it may be, but im not sure everyone outside the woke circle will appreciate it.

would you rather see gal gadot or machete in the next wonder woman movie?

you know what? don’t answer. it was rethorical.

I am kinda hoping more and more that Blizzard do not change the designs. At first I didn’t care one way or the other; the new models look fine, and the old ones also look fine.
But now there is a good reason for not changing them. The outrage is getting silly.

You need to do some deep thinking about the definition of the word ‘bias’ and its uses.

Bias is the direction of your preferences.
Bias is how you like one thing, over another.
Bias is a functional word that links preference and favoritism to a concept.
Bias is why folks with tattoos are criminal, why criminals are outsiders, or conversely why they are all your friends.


ok, maybe im biased to do my work at my best capacity. maybe you do your work at your minimum effort. in the samecontext, absolutely everyone is biased. they are biased to old characters, im biased in WHY not young characters. my question still stands, why the change? your answer is still “why are you biased” and that’s not an answer.

again, im biased to know why the change, you’re biased to know why im against the change, it doesn’t change a thing, question still stands, why the change?

i got it the first time, you favor your questioning on why im against the change, for civility sake, let’s say im not against the change, but asking why. even if i wasn’t against it, the question stands. why the change? if it makes it easier to understand my point read “yeah, they look great, what was the lore behind such an amazing change?” and fundamentally, my question still stands, why the change?

i got it for the fourth time, but again for civility sake, let’s pretend i didn’t, let’s say tatoos are criminal, criminals are outsiders and why are they are all my friends. i don’t get it but let’s say original question was “characters in diablo 2 were tatooed criminals, and VV ommited the criminal tatoos in the remake, what’s the lore behind it?” and maybe then, my question still stands. diablo 2 characters were young and in their prime, vv decided to make them old and depressed, so what’s the lore behind?

i still don’t get why tatooed criminals are my friends but let’s say my tatooed friends are indeed criminals. i can ask my friends if they’re criminals, can VV or blizzard answer why my friends are criminals? no? how about “why the young characters are now old?”

i think five months of silence doesn’t mean “yeah, we care about customer feedback” and that’s my main concern, that if a minor thing that would take me max 40 minutes to fix, is not even adressed in a playerbase based froum, what would happen if their battlenet implementation fails? another 5 months of radio silence?

that’s not enticing to make a blind purchase based on pure confidence.

so, yeah maybe i am

but so are you. your point is?

They are, actually. All the NPCs treat you as a reliable adventurer from the very start. You go out of town and start fighting hordes of demons alone t level 1, by the point you’re level 15 you are already on your way to fight your way to a lesser evil - something your average war veteran soldier would die trying to do.

Plus you run the exact same story on nightmare and hell, so it’s fair to assume that it’s canon that you already start the story being very strong. The leveling system makes sense as “becoming even stronger” rather than you being a complete beginner at the start.

I don’t like super heroes to be honest so I couldn’t care less, and there are older amazons there from what I know. But this is about a dark fantasy, horror themed RPG, and I think it all fits well. And even the “ugly” face is completely irrelevant when you’re zoomed out and in perspective.

I’m actually pretty surprised people are so worked up over this. I guess I understand people play games because of their waifu though.