Scholastic worth it?

[zxcvbn]

Is it worth replacing my books with the Scholastic versions. eg is the Scholastic version of warlock of firetop mountain much different from the puffin version, other than the art?

[CharlesX]

You pick out The Warlock Of Firetop Mountain, when i bought a second-hand Scholastic one to replace my lost, old original it came with a free FF keyring, which was cool if slightly cheap. There are very, very minor differences in gameplay - I think one or two battles are fought singly instead of together or the other way round. Scholastic artwork is obviously different from the previous Puffin & Wizard, but often worse rather than better. I think the artwork is aimed a few months younger, very slightly more kiddie-orientated.
   Basically I wouldn't buy one to replace an existing one unless (a) your existing copy is falling apart or (b) you are the kind of FF obssessive who would buy FF underpants.

[hallucination]

If you don’t have the old books handy and you fancy revisiting them and the scholastic titles are easier to come by, then sure. But they ain’t the puffins of yesteryear, sadly.

The main changes are the art and typesetting. To be picky, the size of the books is different and the pages themselves crappier. I’m not a fan of the new ‘May your stamina never fail!’ proclamations, the wounds and dripping print, and the what-have-yous around the borders of the pages, whatever they are. (To make the pages appear to be of an old dusty tome?) Rules relegated to the back; in two minds about that. The overall design we are to assume is to try to appeal to today’s younger readers. (I am all for that in principle, but question particular choices.) This is all somewhat superficial stuff however, and can be mostly ignored in the playing of a gamebook.

Some titles have various errors fixed, others have issues introduced. There are no revolutionary changes or updates. On each title’s Titannica page, if you scroll down enough, you’ll see something of a comparison of puffin vs wizard vs scholastic changes. Since you mentioned Warlock, I’ll go with that: fightingfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/The_Warlock_of_Firetop_Mountain_(book)

The scholastic Return to Firetop Mountain has the original internal artwork. This is an exception however.

Of course there’s new titles in the scholastic range but you weren’t asking after those.

[kieran]

Aug 30, 2022 22:25:14 GMT hallucination said:

The scholastic Return to Firetop Mountain has the original internal artwork. This is an exception however.

Also true of The Seven Serpents and The Crown of Kings

[hallucination]

Aug 30, 2022 22:30:37 GMT kieran said:

Also true of The Seven Serpents and The Crown of Kings

Ah yes!! How can I have forgotten about Sorcery (alas I did!)

[paperexplorer]

I'm not a fan of "May your stamina never fail" either.

I think the scholastic reprints look hideous. I'd only buy if my originals were falling apart or if I was trying to keep the originals in good condition

[philsadler]

They look awful compared to Puffins, even Wizards. If your old books are falling apart, by those old books again.

[zxcvbn]

Thanks for the replies. Will keep my old versions

[time4tea]

As an oldie who had the original puffin books as a kid, I'm not very keen on the newer Scholastic books at all, tbh. They seem to have made a bunch of pretty awful design decisions. One of the things I loved about the originals were the beautiful full-cover artworks - this 'porthole' design they have settled on is simply horrible. Then, on top of that, replacing the interior illustrations for the reprints with more 'cartoony' ones is another very poor decision. And then, the books aren't even the same size as the originals. I guess they're trying to refresh the series and make it appeal more to younger readers, but they're clearly not for me.

I'd consider buying new releases by Scholastic that are reasonably good, but I'm not interested in the reprints. I'd rather rebuild my collection by buying puffin books on Ebay (even if it'll be slow and probably expensive).

[kieran]

Aug 31, 2022 11:11:32 GMT time4tea said:

Then, on top of that, replacing the interior illustrations for the reprints with more 'cartoony' ones is another very poor decision. 

From a purely business perspective, is it really a poor decision? New readers won't know there were older illustrations and most of the older fans already own all of the Steve and Ian penned Puffin/Wizard books and will probably only be incentivised to buy the newer editions if they offer something different - like new illustrations. The only market they might lose out on are older fans who do not already have all the older editions of Steve/Ian books and don't like the new illustrations.

Have to agree about the awful porthole covers though. I really liked the new covers before they changed to that style.

[hallucination]

Ha - well, yeah. Point taken. Publishing new sets of illustrations is fine for that reason, a business trick, but that doesn’t justify *these* illustrations. Even if some random kids in a product research group responded quite well to this style of illustration (perhaps that’s giving scholastic too much credit!?), I’m not convinced that young FF adventurers, those who’d want to buy/collect the books would really prefer a cartoony style. (Certainly it does not give us, the other market, something new that we value and motivates us to seek these editions out)

[a moderator]

The new illustrations played a big part in convincing me not to bother getting the Scholastic reissues.

[kieran]

Aug 31, 2022 12:58:10 GMT hallucination said:

Ha - well, yeah. Point taken. Publishing new sets of illustrations is fine for that reason, a business trick, but that doesn’t justify *these* illustrations. Even if some random kids in a product research group responded quite well to this style of illustration (perhaps that’s giving scholastic too much credit!?), I’m not convinced that young FF adventurers, those who’d want to buy/collect the books would really prefer a cartoony style. (Certainly it does not give us, the other market, something new that we value and motivates us to seek these editions out)

It's all subjective I guess. I like the cartoony style in principle but not always its execution - The Shamutanti Hills and Appointment with FEAR are particularly poor. Still, I think there was a germ of a good idea in there. Certainly with the likes of Caverns of the Snow Witch I like having both the originals and the new illustrations as both sets are very good in their own way.

It seems that Scholastic have ditched the cartoony style now anyway - the last 3 reprints have used the old illustrations and the two new books seem to be more reminiscent of the older style in their art.

[tyrion]

Scholastic I have and are worth getting are caverns of the snow witch (with new illustrations by Robert Ball that are quite good) and return to firetop mountain (with the original illustrations).

Maybe the sorcery series, although SH has new rubbish illustrations, K-CoT has new illustrations by Robert Ball, and SS and CoK have the original illustrations.

[Wilf]

Aug 30, 2022 21:28:56 GMT zxcvbn said:

Is it worth replacing my books with the Scholastic versions?

I'd say if you can get them for a reasonable price, you'd be better off replacing the Scholastic versions with the Puffin ones.

[time4tea]

Aug 31, 2022 12:29:30 GMT kieran said:

From a purely business perspective, is it really a poor decision?

I totally get that they're marketing them to a newer generation of younger readers (which isn't me) and that younger readers might prefer the more cartoony illustrations.

Business-wise, I don't really have any idea how the new range of books is doing. I assume they're selling somewhat well, since there seem to be quite a few new ones being released, which is good to see. I'm kind of torn about them in general. I mean, it's good to see Fighting Fantasy books doing well and new ones being written, but on the flipside, I very much dislike the new style and I have the impression (from what I've heard/read) that many of the new releases aren't terribly good (compared to the older ones). So, I'd like to support FF and for it to keep going, but do I want to support 'subpar writing' and in a physical form that I don't like?

[time4tea]

Aug 31, 2022 13:52:40 GMT kieran said:

It's all subjective I guess. I like the cartoony style in principle but not always its execution - The Shamutanti Hills and Appointment with FEAR are particularly poor. Still, I think there was a germ of a good idea in there. Certainly with the likes of Caverns of the Snow Witch I like having both the originals and the new illustrations as both sets are very good in their own way.

It seems that Scholastic have ditched the cartoony style now anyway - the last 3 reprints have used the old illustrations and the two new books seem to be more reminiscent of the older style in their art.

I think this another problem I have with it. It's not just the principle of replacing the old illustrations, but I generally dislike a cartoony art style in computer RPGs as well (such as Torchlight, etc.). I prefer my RPGs to be more realistic and gritty, so I'm naturally put off by cartoony illustrations. Even though it was aimed at kids, I always saw FF as leaning more towards being somewhat dark and gritty, in terms of the writing, so I'm not sure a cartoony style suits it very well. It's encouraging to hear the artwork is a bit more gritty in the newer books though.

[CharlesX]

Aug 31, 2022 17:01:47 GMT time4tea said:

Aug 31, 2022 12:29:30 GMT kieran said:

From a purely business perspective, is it really a poor decision?

I totally get that they're marketing them to a newer generation of younger readers (which isn't me) and that younger readers might prefer the more cartoony illustrations.

Business-wise, I don't really have any idea how the new range of books is doing. I assume they're selling somewhat well, since there seem to be quite a few new ones being released, which is good to see. I'm kind of torn about them in general. I mean, it's good to see Fighting Fantasy books doing well and new ones being written, but on the flipside, I very much dislike the new style and I have the impression (from what I've heard/read) that many of the new releases aren't terribly good (compared to the older ones). So, I'd like to support FF and for it to keep going, but do I want to support 'subpar writing' and in a physical form that I don't like?

I've tended to feel it isn't a choice between 'subpar writing' and supporting FF - your words are the height of kindness, because some of these newer FFs really have been not just disappointing but dreadful. My point being if higher quality of FF is not written the series could die.
   There are alternate directions the series could take to reprinting new titles - more FF by J & L, a different royalties format since the original was apparently too generous and the new one doesn't encourage, some way of making older titles accessible getting around the royalties issue, since it's in everyone's interests and physical copy reprints are old hat, making the FF more ambitious than the standard, or more series like Sorcery! and Goldhawk.

[paperexplorer]

I just hope the sales of these two 40th anniversary books blow every other book scholastic has released out of the water. Jackson's book went to number 1 on the kids charts on Amazon UK, so it's possible. But I think a good result is important, because it not only opens the door to changing the art style, but also opens the door to more new stories over further reprints. I mean... just say the next book after these two was a Freeway Fighter reprint with porthole cover and vlado krizan images inside. Could anything be more depressing than that?

[time4tea]

Aug 31, 2022 19:06:28 GMT CharlesX said:

I've tended to feel it isn't a choice between 'subpar writing' and supporting FF - your words are the height of kindness, because some of these newer FFs really have been not just disappointing but dreadful. My point being if higher quality of FF is not written the series could die.
   There are alternate directions the series could take to reprinting new titles - more FF by J & L, a different royalties format since the original was apparently too generous and the new one doesn't encourage, some way of making older titles accessible getting around the royalties issue, since it's in everyone's interests and physical copy reprints are old hat, making the FF more ambitious than the standard, or more series like Sorcery! and Goldhawk.

Yes, if the new releases are that bad, that they barely stand up against the weakest of the original Puffins, then it's hard to see how the series is going to survive long like that.

It's an interesting question as to what they should do. I mean, the quality of writing and design has to come first, right? The snazzy artwork on the cover is what hooks people in initially, but the book has to be good, otherwise they're not going to want to buy more. I thought having a variety of different authors was a strength of the original series, and that seems to have been lost. Having a variety of settings (incl. Sci-fi) was also imo a strength that has been lost. Maybe they're playing it too safe and not taking enough risks?

I remember thinking as a kid: "whoa, there's one where you drive a car through the desert? Cool!", "whoa, they've done one where you fight dinosaurs with giant robots? Crazy!"

Fingers crossed at least one of the new ones is strong. If so I will happily support it.

[terrysalt]

I'm going to take a lot of convincing to buy the 2 new ones. Unless these forums absolutely explode with praise for them, I'll save my money. They've just burned too much goodwill with me.

[paperexplorer]

They are worth it.

But I have a gripe. A week in and the Gold on the spine is already coming off. I noticed comments around that this happened with the Port of Peril Gold spine edition too. Why wouldn't they address this before going Gold again? Yeah, the Gold spine looked good, but at that deterioration, I'd prefer not to have it

[sleepyscholar]

Aug 31, 2022 19:06:28 GMT CharlesX said:

Aug 31, 2022 17:01:47 GMT time4tea said:

I totally get that they're marketing them to a newer generation of younger readers (which isn't me) and that younger readers might prefer the more cartoony illustrations.

Business-wise, I don't really have any idea how the new range of books is doing. I assume they're selling somewhat well, since there seem to be quite a few new ones being released, which is good to see. I'm kind of torn about them in general. I mean, it's good to see Fighting Fantasy books doing well and new ones being written, but on the flipside, I very much dislike the new style and I have the impression (from what I've heard/read) that many of the new releases aren't terribly good (compared to the older ones). So, I'd like to support FF and for it to keep going, but do I want to support 'subpar writing' and in a physical form that I don't like?

I've tended to feel it isn't a choice between 'subpar writing' and supporting FF - your words are the height of kindness, because some of these newer FFs really have been not just disappointing but dreadful. My point being if higher quality of FF is not written the series could die.
   There are alternate directions the series could take to reprinting new titles - more FF by J & L, a different royalties format since the original was apparently too generous and the new one doesn't encourage, some way of making older titles accessible getting around the royalties issue, since it's in everyone's interests and physical copy reprints are old hat, making the FF more ambitious than the standard, or more series like Sorcery! and Goldhawk.

Dunno who told you that the original royalty rate was too generous, but I seriously doubt that it was one of us poor toilers on 6% (actually 3% on a co-written book). Given than J&L were making 4% on books which they did no work whatever on, perhaps you meant too generous to them. But fair's fair, they did start the series. And quite why they feel the need to deprive writers entirely of their copyright, I can't understand (for me it's not the rate of pay that means my books were never republished, it was entirely a matter of my objection to the principle of depriving writers of what is their moral right).

[scouserob]

Sept 16, 2022 1:27:32 GMT paperexplorer said:

They are worth it.

But I have a gripe. A week in and the Gold on the spine is already coming off. I noticed comments around that this happened with the Port of Peril Gold spine edition too. Why wouldn't they address this before going Gold again? Yeah, the Gold spine looked good, but at that deterioration, I'd prefer not to have it

My copy of Shadow of the Giants has also now got a less than pristine gold spine after less than a fortnight, and just the two plays, thus far.

It is such a shame as I really like the cover art, the internal art and the gamebook itself.
Yet on the bookshelf all that will now be seen is a cheap looking shabby spine.   

Contrast the fortnight old Shadow of the Giants spine with the 38 year old Scorpion Swamp spine.
Ridiculous!

[hallucination]

Yup, my fingers have been covered in gold sparkles these last two weeks!

[philsadler]

This is a real shame. Has it happened to everyone? I still haven't played any of the latest ones.

[misomiso]

Yes mine is completely scuffed. Quite annoyed actually as it was my signed copy I wanted to keep.

[bloodbeasthandler]

Mine scuffed too. Simple contact with human skin seems enough to do it. Short of wearing a pair of gloves to read the books I don't know what the answer is. Maybe Scholastic ought to up their production standards.

[hallucination]

And my Crystal of Storms has the inverted issue of the gold text coming off the spine. Currently to an extent that it is looking kinda cool, however. I think I prefer it this way around (not that that's the solution to the issue).

The two newest books, though, have great covers and are full of incredible illustrations: in this regard their artistic merits are evident. the books do not need these kitschy gold spines as selling points (if ever they were).

The hardcover version of Shadow looks and feels great, and escapes this issue, but I havent used it for a playthrough. While on this note, i'll add that the hardcover edition of Jon Green's latest ACE is bloody awesome. For most FF I am quite glad that the illustrations are not coloured, but here it is not so. And after Len O'Grady's touches, Neil Googe's illustrations really sing

[time4tea]

Sept 16, 2022 7:19:07 GMT scouserob said:

My copy of Shadow of the Giants has also now got a less than pristine gold spine after less than a fortnight, and just the two plays, thus far.

It is such a shame as I really like the cover art, the internal art and the gamebook itself.
Yet on the bookshelf all that will now be seen is a cheap looking shabby spine.   

Contrast the fortnight old Shadow of the Giants spine with the 38 year old Scorpion Swamp spine.
Ridiculous!

View Attachment

After only 2 weeks? Wow, that is awful, and quite off-putting to buy the new books, tbh. I'd be tempted to hold out and see if they do a version without the gold spine, but still with the full cover art.

Bring back green spines (and the 'proper' form factor while you're at it ...)!!