This article is an overview of Diablo’s place in 1990s computer game history as it pertains to technical prowess in harnessing machine-specs; that is, this article places Diablo in history as it pertains to Blizzard North’s ability or willingness to harness available software and hardware technologies in 1996.I recommend that you read my 1990s computer game history, which stands as the best tech-lite overview of 1990s computer games on the internet.Diablo was released by Blizzard North in 1996.In terms of artistry and Roguelike game-logic Diablo is a masterpiece, but in terms of 2D engine-performance Diablo is only solid at best. When the viewport is static Diablo looks great, but when the viewport scrolls Diablo is just barely passable.Diablo and Quake both came out in 1996, but Quake’s 3D rendering engine powering along at 40 FPS while shifting around thousands of Gouraud-shaded polygons made Diablo’s 2D engine chugging along at 20 FPS while shifting around 20 sprites look like a complete joke.Since Diablo’s viewport is not avatar-anchorless like Fallout but rather avatar-anchored as in arcade-game scrollers, it would have been better if Blizzard North chose to sacrifice any aspect of Diablo that got in the road of delivering the smoothest gameplay possible, even if that meant lowering sprite-counts.When an isometric-scroller is avatar-anchored and action-based, it should lift its framerate standards to the point of the classic shoot ’em up. On the other hand, avatar-anchorless or avatarless computer games can get away with low framerates and jerky edgescreen auto-scrolling since many of them are not action-based (e.g., city-builders or turn-based strategy games).What would you rather play: an action-based computer game that shifts around 100 sprites simultaneously at 20 FPS (with jerky scrolling) or one that shifts 20 sprites around simultaneously at 50 FPS (with smooth scrolling)? No Arcadian or Amigan would choose the former: the latter is going to be more enjoyable to play; the latter is going to feature better gameplay.If Diablo employed turn-based combat and three-character control, it would have been an apex-level 1990s computer game. (Its framerate and scrolling would also have been passable under such a combat system.)Note that Blizzard Entertainment’s WarCraft 2 (1995) had silky-smooth, per-pixel hardware scrolling in SVGA 640×480, but not Blizzard North’s Diablo (1996).Thus, as it pertains to technical prowess in harnessing machine specs, Diablo cannot be placed in the first-rank of 1990s Computer Games. However, in respect to Roguelike RNG and artistry Diablo is top-tier.But artistry has little to do with engine-performance. Given a palette range and fixed dimensions a tile is a tile and a sprite is a sprite, regardless of artistry: the trick is scrolling the viewport and moving the sprites smoothly. And getting the engine to tap the hardware to a level such that smoothness is maintained when the on-screen action scales.As Diablo shows, that is easier said than done.An isometric-scroller running at 20 FPS might have been acceptable in the early 90s on i80286es running MS-DOS, but not in 1996 on Pentium 60s running DirectX Windows.Besides, smooth isometric-scrollers with undulating terrain predate Diablo by one decade. While not as complex as Diablo, nor did they require anything above i80286/M68k.Diablo Tech-specsMinimum CPU: Intel Pentium 60 MHz (x86, 32 bit)Minimum RAM in megs: 8 MBVideo Memory (vRAM): 1 MBOperating System: Windows 95-11 (Supports NT 4.0)API: DirectX 3.0: DirectDrawDistribution Media: 1x CD-ROM Resolution/Aspect Ratio: Square-pixel SVGA 640×480 4:3 ONLYColor depth: 8 bit (256 colors)3D Hardware Acceleration (Direct3D, OpenGL): NoAudio: Sampled speech and full OSTInput Device: kb/mMultiplayer: TCP/IP Battle.net, IPX LAN, TAPI-compliant modem, serial cable (daisy chain, routers)No. of players: 1-4Hard disk space (full install): 600 MBFramerate cap: 25 FPSGraphics: Displayed in 2D, but 3D-prerenderedPlaying field perspective: IsometricMovement: Point and clickCombat System: Fully Real-time click to attackDialogue system: Viewport-overlaid scrolling text, no dialogue treesUser Interface: Switchable modes, click and drop, grid-based inventoryAvatars: Pre-rendered sprites with 8-way rotationArea Make-up: Tile-rigged area design, randomized (RNG dungeons)Playing field triggers: Tile-based coordsSeamless Transition: NoEnvironmental Destructibility: Placeables such as barrelsGameplay Verticality: Terrain is not height-mappedScreen-scrolling: 8-way Avatar-anchored screen-scrollingFog of War: YesAutomap: Toggleable overlayEnvironmental Interactivity: ZeroCinematization: FMV cutscenes, scrolling text, voiced dialogue