Are genres outdated ?

Nothing better seems to have replaced them, so I would think no. Perhaps they're less useful than they used to be, but that's a different question I think.

Just as you have different types of people, you have different types of game. Stereotypes mostly do not encompass the entirety of a person's personality. Same is the case with genres.

I think genres can be helpful as a way of categorising things (after all, that's really why they exist in the first place).

That said, genres can be really problematic too. I mean, I look at the huge debates over Fallout 4 - is it more of a first-person action game with light RPG elements? Is it an RPG with more action elements? Is it an action game with a first-person view with RPG elements?

Who gives a shit.

And yet, there have been massive online debates about these questions for months now. Such debates are a pointless waste of time, at least when they revolve around justifying "how much of an RPG" a particular game is. Again, who cares? If the game is good - if people are enjoying it and it has genuine merit - then who cares how it's classified?

Alot of these RPG arguments tend to boil down to gamers treating 'RPG' like it's some sacred high-brow videogame genre played by intellectuals.

They argue about whether or not something is an RPG as a means to legitimize a game or a developer, as well as provide justification that the player is above someone that plays a supposedly dumb shooter.

@Maroxad:

You don't get it. Repetition is just a basic game logic and pretty much every game has some sort of repetition. Whether you like it or not. If you don't like repetition and level grind then rpg's aren't for you. I for one love it and so do plenty of other gamers. If there's no level grinding then it's not really an rpg. Borderlands follows the rpg formula by the letter.

Large level up system, weapons that have a chance of doing critical damage and accuracy that can be enhanced. I remember even the old rpg's and jrpg's had those factors in combat where sometimes attacks would miss or do critical damage and some even had different elements that can be used to exploit enemy weaknesses. Top that off with raising HP and MP as you level up. Borderlands has EVERYTHING an rpg should have and it's executed in an fps fashion.

So just by hearing you say that those elements are signs of a bad rpg already tells me that you don't have a clue as to what a true rpg is about.

I agree that a lot of games are cross genre nowadays, but there are def still 1 genre specific games out there. So, yes and no.

At its core an RPG is about letting you, the player roleplay. And this involves as many elemnets to get the player as much in character as possible.

Levelling is a vestige from strategy games and grinding is a very gamey element. That comes across as degenerate, unrealistic and very gamey. Early RPGs usually had really low level caps, with level caps of around 4-8 being around in several prominent RPGs.

And no, Borderlands doesnt do everything an RPG should do. Merely having the elements isnt good enough, more important is to actually implement them well. And as it happens the RPG elements are terribly implemented. There is little variety between builds and even classes. Itemization is complete crap. The game gives little opportunity to roleplay, and even explore due to locking out large parts of the map until you complete a certain quest. There is little reason to create 2 gunzerkers. Compare this to Diablo 1 or 2 for instance. With Borderlands 1 and 2, they took Diablo, added a shooter on it. But forgot to bring the stuff that made Diablo actually work. As a result, we have nothing but the shell of Diablo in Borderlands, wrapped around in a subpar shooter. Borderlands is really nothing but a skinnerbox wrapped around in an unsatisfying RPG and an unsatisfying shooter. Taking the strengths of neither and the weaknesses of both.

@Maroxad:

And WHY would you put realistic and rpg in the same sentence? It's all mathematical. The essence is to get you in the role, sure (though immersion is more of a western rpg trait) but the rest lies in strengthening characters be it turn based or not. And Borderlands does that and beyond. Every element of an rpg. That's a huge draw to it. Character creation shouldn't really matter considering standard rpg's force you to stick with what the developers give you.

i agree with the most part

But, in terms of Action RPGs, cases like Mass Effect series or TW series, i think if you remove the "RPG" elements they are simply nothing, it's the "RPG" elements that makes them so charming and enjoyable making you gloss over the gameplay shortcomings, however, i loved the gameplay of the said series as well, actually, in Action RPGs, gameplay is not the main hook for me, maybe that's why i'm pretty okay with their shortcomings in that regard and you don't....which is a matter of preference.

About the highlighted part, so you take Gears of War series over Mass Effect series, right? Since the former is merely an action game and the latter is an action game with RPG elements. But i personally inclined towards Mass Effect due to a better story, replay value and better characterization and lore.

When an RPG is essentially 1st and 2nd grade arithmetics the game, instead of a proper roleplaying game. Then... why be an RPG? RPGs were never about strengthening characters, that was always the hack and slash genre (which Diablo is a computerized version of). Without all the actual roleplaying, all you have left is a dumb game without any of the things that made the genre good in the first place.

As a matter of fact, stats and attributes in early RPGs were not modifiers which they are today. In early RPGs, they were descriptors, to help you the player define your character. That was their primary role, not to give +1 damage.

Standard RPGs never forced you to stick with what the developers gave you. that was almost exclusively a jRPG trait. And there is a reason jRPGs are now moving away from that.

Ultima, Wizardry, the Goldbox games, Oubliette, A Bard's Tale, Might and Magic. These are standard RPGs, not Final Fantasy.

Edit: To answer your question. The more realistic things are. The more believable and the more players are encouraged to roleplay. The more gamey, the more the players actions will reflect the game mechanics rather than what the characters the player is playing as would have done in that situation. Something that is rather detrimental to roleplaying.

That's the point, who gives a shit? hence outdated.

Outdated: No

Need to be redefined yes. There are all ways going to be some games that fit very neatly into a specific genre. Like Civilization, StarCraft and many others where the game does one thing and does not vary from that. Then there are games with Mass Effect and other that do implement multiple genres but is based in heavily in one genre. So no games fitting into a genre is not outdated.

The roots of RPG:s lie in pen 'n' paper roleplaying games, so the closer a computer RPG is to that experience, the more of an RPG it is. The further a game strays from that experience, the less of an RPG it is. That's just how it is. It cannot be contested. You have no case coming up with your own definition.

There are games that almost completely lack repetition out there. A good example of such a genre is the adventure game genre.

Totally agree. Your levels and stats are more important than your actual skill at aiming at enemies. (So why give you the control over the aiming and shooting at all, huh?) And sometimes the enemies take thousands of hits to go down. What a bunch of shit. A shooter couldn't possibly get much worse than that. Prime example of how the two genres mix really badly. Truly shitty game design.

@Maroxad:

Shows how many rpg's you've played. ? You sound like a heavy western rpg kinda gamer but if you play both sides of the spectrum (wrpg's and jrpg's), you'd see that you're entirely wrong if you thought that rpg's don't involve level grinding or that realism and rpg go hand in hand. And even more so when you mentioned level caps. Only the modern western rpg's like Elder Scrolls have weak level caps. And they appeal to different people. A wrpg formula is not a mold for EVERY friggin rpg in the industry y'know. And even though jrpg's are more under the radar than before, there are tons that still with hold the old Final Fantasy traditional format even till this very day. You might not like them though.

Wrpg's have a format, jrpg's have a format. If Borderlands wants to take from jrpg's a little, why not? Both are a standard but neither are THE set standard for rpg's.

@doubutsuteki:

No, adventure games totally have repetition too. Every genre does.

Uncharted:

Shoot baddies, climb, shoot, climb, cutscene, and platforming but not always in that order.

Tomb Raider:

Climb, platforming, shoot baddies, large slide, cutscene. Rinse and repeat.

Pretty much every adventure game has you fighting, pick up items or shooting something then basic platforming. It's basically the same formula every time! And this from experience playing adventure games since Super Mario World!

Those are action-adventure games. I'm referring to pure adventure games, like the Monkey Island series.

@doubutsuteki:

Monkey Island is a friggin point and click game! You wanna throw visual novel in it too?

Graphical adventure game with a point 'n' click interface, yeah. Almost non-existent action elements.

VN:s - why not? Those aren't action-adventures either.

They're still important, but they've for sure gotten a bit fuzzier. Like the "Action adventure". the **** is that anymore. Could be anything from Assassin's Creed to Zelda.

Dude, he plays/had played all types of RPGs.

@bussinrounds:

Then he's missed the entire point of them. ?

@doubutsuteki:

Ehhh....adventures are kinda hard to pinpoint exactly because there are so many sub genres. But even then, it's dialogue, click item, sometimes you can move the character, choose what to say and again and again. But they don't feel that repetitive because you have a heavy story narrative to keep you entertained.

Adventure games don't rely on repetition, just because you oftentimes have the option to repeat the same action.

They're not hard to pinpoint for me at all. Action-adventure is not a sub-genre of adventure games, it's a hybrid genre: action + adventure.

Action adventures have been around since Ff12. Its not so hard. There are turn based rpgs and action rpgs.

TC, you are just giving one example... RPG's, and ALOT of RPG's have been a cross over in genres, even back in 2000...

So no genres are not outdated, a genre is a genre. You think genre's are also outdated in movies, books? Don't think so, even when almost every movie/book has cross overs.

enre is a word with a defenition that won't go away, just add an "S" to the word.

It wasn't as significant as now.

Not sure about them, but i guess you're right.

What you mean by "erne" ? didn't get it sry :D

I have probably played more RPGs than you. And I have definately been exposed to a much greater variety of RPGs than you. And my experience with RPGs greatly exceeds the limit of the jRPG/wRPG spectrum. Tabletop RPGs, Hack and Slash, Roguelikes. I even managed to play chainmail once. And if you dont see the significance of chainmail... you are in no position to talk about the purpose of RPGs... or call anyone ignorant of the genre.

Anyways, Level grinding is a sign of a poorly paced or balanced RPG... not only that, but probably the sign of a bad game in general. Pacing is important to games. And games that force you to do repetitive, mindless actions for hours in order to do the worthwhile stuff is not a good game anymore, it becomes a chore. Level grinding, exists as a consequence of the leveling mechanic and random encounters. It was never the means, nor the ends. Unlike roleplaying which was the ends of an RPG.

HP was created by Gary Gygax to basically stabilize combat and make it less RNG heavy. Instead of every blow being fatal. Characters could survive blows. This was important because players would grow attached to their characters as they roleplayed as them, and losing them because of a single bad roll didnt exactly make for interesting game design. Death in D&D was effectively permanent.

Levelling exists as a vestige from the strategy games D&D branched out of. Several strategy games had a veterency system, in which veterans were roughly 2 times stronger than a green and an elite was 2 times stronger than a veteran. Unfortunately, in the case of RPGs... campaigns lasted a lot longer than these strategy games would, and levelling would effectively go out of hand. But needless to say... the levelling was the veterancy system, adapted to a new genre.

Equipment was well... equipment. You would bring rope, torches, crew members, potions, weapons, armor and anything else you would need.

All these elements augmented the roleplaying experience in one way or another. HP would prevent you from constantly creating new characters (or at least... less frequently, because you would die a lot in the first edition). Levelling, served as a veterncy system, where some characters just being more experience able to fare better in combat. Equipment acted like actual equipment, and not as an Arms Race mechanic it does in jRPGs and borderlands. The system found in jRPGs and even most modern wRPGs is just too dumbed down to be any compelling. In most games, equipment is nothing but busywork rather than something that would add something meaningful to the experience like it would in say... 1e. Of the jRPGs, kudos to Pokemon for actually doing something meaningful with it. +3 attack is not a compelling system.

My point is, there is no roleplaying in Borderlands. It has RPG elements, but those exist as a means to a skinner box instead of a compelling RPG experience.

Edit: Of course there is more than one way to design an RPG. And not all have to follow the same mold. But some games actually does something meaningful with the RPG elements. Others did nothing but add a skinner box to the whole thing. And I for one, don't like skinner boxes.

No, the genre is called adventure. And visual novel is a subgenre of adventure too. I would argue there are 3 noteable subgenres of adventure are text based adventures, visual novels and point nad click adventures.

Yup. I have found Action, especially FPS to mix terribly with RPG.

The only genre, I have some confidence in with RPGs mixing together with is Strategy... which is heavily because RPGs effectively branched out of them. Connecting them back is much easier than it is with other games.

As far as I am concerned, no RPG matches Jagged Alliance 2's combat, and for best fantasy combat, Divinity: Original Sin and Temple of Elemental Evil are close competitors. All 3 of those games have an emphasis on tactics in combat, rather than reflexes.

Hmm, I would take it over yeah, it's a better game, but more so because of the multiplayer. I appreciate Mass Effect's stories, characters, and all that stuff, but nah the gameplay does bother me. Gears was good for the first game, and most of the 2nd game, 3rd game after Anvil Gate I was really at "Man, I never want to play another one of these again"...now I probably will try the Gears of War 4 campaign, but right now I'm only really buying it for the multiplayer.

Gears has its short comings in the gameplay department, it's just more mechanically sound than the Mass Effect games are. I don't know push come to shove, between those 2 franchises on sp only, it might be a push. I'd rather play a Binary Domain, Vanquish, or Uncharted 2 than both. I'll take either over Max Payne 3. Exceptional shooting mechanics, but Rockstar ruins the gameplay, because they are Rockstar.

And yeah I can get that, I get why people like The Witcher and Mass Effect, I just think they warrant a level of criticism against their gameplay that they don't get, when they should. They are enjoyable though, I'm looking forward to see how Bioware bounces back with Andromeda.

Nowadays, RPGs are barely even a genre anymore, but just a set of mechanics that could be applied to any genre. Almost every major RPG today is basically (insert genre here) with RPG elements. For example:

Souls, Witcher and Skyrim are like action-adventures (e.g. Zelda) with RPG elements.

The Mass Effect trilogy are like third-person shooters (e.g. Gears of War) with RPG elements.

Persona 3 & 4 are like visual novels (e.g. Danganronpa) with RPG elements.

Fire Emblem and X-COM are like turn-based strategy games (e.g. Nintendo Wars) with RPG elements.

I think there's some validity to that, yes. Where I see this surfacing - generally - isn't so much with genre discussions but with the whole idea of "streamlining" in games. There are a lot of people who automatically see "streamlining" as "dumbing down", when I don't think they are necessarily synonymous.

In my earlier example, there are some really valid criticisms that people do make around Fallout 4 - what I mean is, when someone says "Fallout used to be like X, and now it's like Y, and I think that's a negative change"; that's a very valid conversation. But what happens is that it gets mixed up and conflated with whether or not a particular game is more or less like an RPG or a shooter or whatever, which I think isn't necessarily helpful.

Yeah? I know that Sirtech made Jagged Alliance 2 and that Troika did The Temple of Elemental Evil. Maybe I'll play those games sometime yet.

What if

x=RPG

y=shooter

?

"Streamlining" isn't bad per se: It depends on whether desirable elements and mechanics relating to gameplay are lost in the process or not.

Yeah, in the case where X=RPG and Y=Shooter, then as I said, it's a valid discussion to have. I think if we are talking about the actual changes and whether or not they feel good/right in a Fallout game then that's totally fine. What bothers me is the huge quibbling around defining the fine lines between genres (which can indeed be very blurry at times).

And I totally agree with your point about streamlining. A lot of people just view it in a very one-dimensional way; but I think you are right to say that it really depends on whether or not valuable ideas and mechanics are actually being lost in the translation. Good point.

You'll def want to use the Circle of 8 modpack for ToEE (game is very buggy without it) and there's a fantastic mod for JA2 called the 1.13 mod, but you'll prob want to hold off on that till after you get use to the game a bit)

@Maroxad:

So according to you, Final Fantasy, and basically almost every traditional jrpg is in terrible design? Well, I've played a crap load of them too, can't say if it's more than you but it's definitely not less. Was I calling you ignorant? Not exactly but you clearly have a different definition of what makes an rpg an rpg. And that's pretty weird considering how many you've played.

You like "meaningful rpg's" and clearly hate level grinding which is understandable but it just goes back to your preference. I used to agree with your way of thinking actually and I could never find myself to beat any jrpg. Until Persona 4 made me into a believer though. And to me, jrpg's don't need that level of immersion when wrpg's played the hell out of it already. Sometimes it's great to play through a game with a character you created and a story you can craft your own. But other times, I just wanna sit back and enjoy a good story with little thought processing. If that makes my time with traditional jrpg's meaningless then so sue me!

I'd just like to say this after reading your thoughts and this just goes to the way I see rpg's as a genre.

In design, wrpg's look better to some with the level of creativity and immersion they offer. It sounds awesome and it is when done right. But as a writer, it comes off as lazy and sounds more like choosing the easy way out of creating a meaningful experience. It's a huge pain to go through the trouble in creating interesting characters and a unique world to play in. And for some writers, you'd be worried about whether or not the player will like the cast you created. So it's tempting to just say, "Fudge it. Let them make whoever they want. That way it's the player's fault if the character design sucks." That's why it's more impressive to see how many different story concepts Japanese developers can make because it's always something new. To me, there's nothing more meaningful than engaging in good stories and level grinding is more than just repetition. It's the very concept of strengthening the characters. Some games like Persona use that as an excuse to strengthen character relationships. It's that drive to become a stronger person and overcome a big obstacle. At its core, level grinding is the videogame mechanic for character development. And some developers use it in junction with the story arc so that chemistry between characters can feel more fulfilling. (If so and so is paired up with such and such then their relationship will strengthen as they fight and do more quests together. And that'll incline the buddy to help you out more in battle.) And the player will feel proud of putting in the effort into making the characters as strong as possible. In a story that has plenty of use a mechanic and the length of the game is given more longevity.

Nothin' beats the feeling you get when you master your characters at level 99 and tower over baddies and say, "Yeeeah, you're in my neighborhood now, bitches! I AM A GOD! Bow down to me!!!" Because it took soooo much work to get there. And frankly, that's part of the reason why wrpg's are typically shorter than jrpg's. You may call it useless filler but it can actually help create a very fulfilling experience when done properly.

Yeah... as a genre. traditional jRPGs got very little right. JRPGs are RPGs, but they do the RPG bit very poorly. So is borderlands, an FPS/RPG hybrid... as badly as it fails in being satisfying in either regard. The menu based combat was shallow at best, and incredibly dumb at worst. Games like Wizardry used Menu based combat too, but executed it far better than Final Fantasy ever did. Unlike FF where the only two worthwhile spells were your best healing spell and your best attack spell. Nearly every single spell in Wizardry served their purpose. But for all their flaws, they were still better than Borderlands 2.

Persona 4 was not exactly what I would call a traditional jRPG. Sure, it had the same old menu based combat. But the whole pacing and structure of the game was radically different. Of course, this is not me defending Persona 4 at all. That game had serious issues with pacing, variety and the general dating sim section of the game had in terms of gameplay, very little going for it. Picking the objectively right choice (the one that gives you more ponits) does not make for compelling gameplay.

I hope you are not implying that wRPG worldbuilding is poor. The likes of TES, Fallout, The Witcher, Ultima, Arcanum, Betrayal at Krondor, have far more compelling worlds than the ones in the majority of jRPGs. jRPGs does however, have arguably better characterization on average, with Persona and Tactics Ogre coming to mind. And no... for most of the part. The jRPG protagonists are hardly original, most of them heavily rooted in cliches and anime tropes. The reason RPG developers let you create your own character is because that is partially the point of the genre.

What is Fantasy Role Playing? Role playing is just as it sounds. You play the role of something someone other than yourself. Just like professional actors and actresses, you pretend to be a character, acting and reacting to situations as he or she would. In fantasy role playing (FRP), you also pretend to be another, but you can do so in a fantasy world of magic, myth, and medieval customs. In this fantasy world, you create characters to role play called Player Characters. Just like you, these characters have their own individual strengths, weaknesses, personalities, and goals. You guide them through this fantasy world watching as they encounter enchanting creatures, mythical monsters, diabolical traps, and mesmerizing riddles. And, of course, as in any situation, your actions in the present (and even your past) will ultimately affect your future. Player Characters are created with the abilities and skills necessary to deal with these fantasy situations. For example, in Crusaders of the Dark Savant, you may create an Alchemist who has the power to conjure spells that charm monsters. You may create Samurai, Fighters, and Ninja with weapons sturdy enough to duel the most powerful dragons. You create a group, or party, of six characters in Crusaders of the Dark Savant, so that you can achieve a delicate balance of power that one person, all alone, couldn’t possibly develop. You’ll have spell casters, warriors, and thieves. You’ll have specialists in the ancient arts of thaumaturgy, alchemy, and legerdemain. And you’ll watch as your characters grow in experience and power. More importantly, you will enjoy the excitement of seeing the world through the eyes of an Elf, a Gnome, a Mook, or a Faerie. That’s fantasy role playing. It’s a story you join at the beginning with your party of characters, write as you progress through the adventure, and, as you turn the last page, savor at the end.

That is the purpose of predefined characters. Because they exist as a tool to write your own story. And they do a damn fine job of doing so. Compare this to Borderlands 2, which does not provide you any tools to write your own story. The witcher games provides some tools, to be sure, but I felt it was too limited for my own tastes. Deus Ex had a predefined protagonist, you are J.C. Denton. But J.C. Denton's actual character left up to the player... emphasizing that whole write your own story bit.

Speak for yourself... I personally find mastering a game a lot more satisfying than maxing my characters stats. Because that is something i achieved through skill and mastery. And it feels like I accomplished something through hard work, rather than mindlessly mashing the A button for long enough. You still get that "you are in my neighbourhood feeling", except for the fact that instead of your character having high numbers, it is you, the player who is kicking ass. Either through masterful tactics or other ways to demonstrate mastery of the game.

I feel that railshooters are outdated. It feels like they had to make games on rails in the past because the hardware was too bad to have the player control how they want to in a 3D space. This is not a problem anymore and hasn't been for a long time. Games on rails are also not as fun as the games that give you full control. Playing a railshooter to me feels like it's just blocking me from doing what I want.

@Maroxad:

And we got to the root of all evil. You hate jrpg's! I knew it all along! I dunno how such a heavy rpg fan can be so prejudice! That's bias, BIG TIME BIAS! Can't we all just enjoy every type of rpg and call it a day? Hmm?

Also, I wasn't saying wrpg world building sucks, just lazy. And if the player isn't creative, they're usually stuck with a crappily self made character. I slammed into this wall too many times in creation heavy games and took me like a buncha tries to make a likeable main character. I get why you'd have it in the game but maybe I don't wanna spend an hour making a space man or khajiit.

And to what you said about Borderlands, it's true there's not much to the role playing when you got such little choice. But I never really thought of it that way. I was just thinking of it as an open world jrpg like pea shooter. And I'm a sucker for jrpg's. Now I know why I love Borderlands and why you hate it. It all makes sense now!?

Pretty cool you played D&D. I never really got the chance to try it myself but I was talking about video game rpg's, not dictionary mentioned ones.

Lazy? How exactly are wRPG universes any less lazy than jRPG ones. WRPG univers are usually full of background wars, political incidents, and founding of multiple religions and whatnot. Tonnes of different cultures all with their own histories. Multiple varying perspectives on events... and a lot more. It took BioWare a HELL lot more effort to create the Mass Effect Milky Way than it did for Square Soft to create the world of FF7 or FF13.

I primarily dislike Borderlands because it is a terrible FPS. Not because it is a terrible RPG.

And no, I dont dislike jRPGs. I dislike traditional jRPGs. The ones that Followed Final Fantasy 4's formula.

I like jRPGs when they do something and does it well... here are some of the jRPGs I like

• Pokemon (Team Building, Good Menu Based Combat)
• Tactics Ogre (Excellent Narrative coupled with the fact that it is an sRPG, good C&C)
• Fire Emblem (An RPG franchise where resource management is actually important, and a single wrong move can cost you dearly)
• Final Fantasy Tactics (Team Building)
• Valkyria Chronicles (Enjoyable turn based combat)
• Shin Megami Tensei 1-3 (Team Building, compelling universes)
• Devil Survivor (Lets take the book of revelations and put it in a game, excellent atmosphere, excellent storytelling which explores the world in a decline and how society would react when we take away things that we humans take for granted)
• Labyrinth of Touhou (Very difficult dungeon crawler, which actually gets ATB right)
• Etrian Oddysey (Which made exploration actually pretty satisfying, excellent balance between tough and fair)
• Dark Souls (Do I really need to explain this one?)

@Maroxad:

I remember Mass Effect. They almost detailed an entire universe like aliens, and all that jazz you mentioned. It would feel more relevant if it wasn't so well hidden in the index of the menu system. They did the same with Fallout and Skyrim but it sucks how little the world history had to deal with the actual story. You had to look for it.

When I said world build, I meant level design though. Too many wrpg's in the middle ages or in outer space. Final Fantasy worlds and architecture are way more creative than Elder Scrolls and jrpg's give us some funky looking monsters.

Final Fantasy's world is not more creative than The Elder Scrolls. Definately not more creative than Morrowind.

Nor is hte world more creative than the one in Arcanum.

I finding i have less time to play open world games. I still never got around to finishing Witcher 3 or Fallout 4. I'm thinking i just going to stick to mostly online games. Saying that i want Mafia 4 to play.

The genre is outdated for me going forward.

@Maroxad:

?

Thanks. I'll look into it.

I think that Age of Wonders III does both strategy and RPG pretty well - but it leans more to the strategy than the RPG side, though.

Yea, I picked up the earlier one (Shadow Magic) on GoG, but haven't tried it yet. Heard it was pretty good too.

Here's another one along those lines to check out...

https://www.gog.com/game/eador_genesis