Real Life Gamebooks

[CharlesX]

For whatever reason, our local library had 7 of the 8 in the series of these gamebooks - I did not think the world of this gamebook series, neither was it particularly critically acclaimed, best-selling or well-known, so this will serve as much as a review\blog as a forum exchange.

     YOU were in an historical period (the oldest was the Battle Of Hastings, the newest was about the War On Terror in the then modern day 1990 era). Often for example if there was a revolution you could play for either the revolutionaries or the other side. Revolution can be exciting but there were probably too many set in revolutionary times, with not only the English Civil War but also the French Revolution, the American revolution and the unsuccessful Jacobite rebellion.

  You have a pool of points which you distribute into skills, which you'd test throughout. If you could play as one of two sides, you might experience the same event from two different perspective (granular) - a minuteman is running to escape the British, a redcoat is trying to shoot down patriots. The writing was variable - I would say one or two in the series were good - but on the whole I personally found it dry, military and unmemorable. There were sometimes too many strategic military decisions. The concept was a better one on paper than it was in practice, and neither was it perhaps always executed brilliantly. My favourites were some of the modern ones such as one having you escape from a WW2 POW camp.

   The writing sometimes had a bias in favour of the establishment - the British solders were talked up in terms of their military ability in 'Redcoats & Minutemen', while it was unironically asked 'if you want to be a traitor to your country' if you want to join the revolutionaries. I don't know whether the British ever thought they would win the revolution even being born one. The gamebook on Hastings asks if 'you want to be a dirty spy' if you want to support the French, while the gamebook on the French Revolution asks if you want to be a 'noble' or 'filthy commoner'. I don't remember the exact words but you get the picture, and of course, those three examples are the 'losing' side. It's like a slight historical inaccuracy which can be irritating.

   I enjoy gamebooks set in the past, they don't have to involve magic or have an advanced game system. These gamebooks didn't last long and I would say they were average, 1-3 stars (out of 5 stars) gamebooks. However, if you see one in a second-hand store, why not flip through and see if it's for you.

[pip]

I did play some of those as a kid, and they also left a very "meh" impression. Not terrible, but nothing too great either. Maybe I was too young to be interested in historical gamebooks (Bloodbeasts and the Earl of Drumer will certainly be more exciting for a kid) but based on your comments, it seems the series doesn't necessarily get better as you grow older.

[kieran]

Nov 30, 2022 15:52:54 GMT CharlesX said:

I don't know whether the British ever thought they would win the revolution even being born one.

On paper, the Redcoats should have beaten the revolutionaries pretty handily. They were better armed, better trained, better supplied and more experienced. The revolutionaries had a ridiculous number of lucky breaks that repeatedly saved them from disaster.

By the way dragonwarrior8 is currently reviewing this series for his blog - his opinion so far seems to mirror yours: gamebookreviews.blogspot.com/p/real-life.html?m=1

Personally I only played the first one and thought it perfectly meh.

[roidhun]

Surprised nobody's mentioned the fact that in the eighth and last book you actually get to make a difference to history. You can either join the SAS and kill Marxist terrorists like Lewis Collins in Who Dares Wins, or you can join the terrorists and blow up Parliament. Wonder how many angry young lefties chose the latter so they could imagine themselves assassinating Margaret Thatcher?

[CharlesX]

Aug 16, 2023 22:32:47 GMT roidhun said:

Surprised nobody's mentioned the fact that in the eighth and last book you actually get to make a difference to history. You can either join the SAS and kill Marxist terrorists like Lewis Collins in Who Dares Wins, or you can join the terrorists and blow up Parliament. Wonder how many angry young lefties chose the latter so they could imagine themselves assassinating Margaret Thatcher?

I didn't because I never read it - it was never a very popular series like CYOA, FF, Give Yourself Goosebumps or Lone Wolf.

   Kim Newman's Life's Lottery, an adult gamebook, was quite clearly written by a Labour sympathizer ("The Thatcher years grind on" it says at one point); at another point you can try to blow up part of the Lottery. Neither of those things, nor the cynical, student, vaguely subversive tone of the book ever lift it to being above-average in my opinion.

   The same would seem to me to be true of Real Life gamebooks, their writing was good but undistinguished, and gameplay unremarkable. I believe though I haven't read this particular one, so.

[bloodbeasthandler]

Nov 30, 2022 15:52:54 GMT CharlesX said:

 However, if you see one in a second-hand store, why not flip through and see if it's for you.

I certainly will. 
Having said that, I have NEVER seen one of these books 'in the wild', neither when they first came out in the shops nor second hand since. 
Outside of ebay and the library round where CharlesX lived... has anyone else seen them?

Nov 30, 2022 20:30:50 GMT kieran said:

By the way dragonwarrior8 is currently reviewing this series for his blog - his opinion so far seems to mirror yours: gamebookreviews.blogspot.com/p/real-life.html?m=1  

Personally I only played the first one and thought it perfectly meh.

What a pity. I would have expected the French Revolution to be one of the least 'meh' periods of history to inhabit. Oh well. 

Thanks for pointing out the review... I noticed some pretty scathing comments by dragonwarrior, among them:

The gameplay aspect doesn't fare much better. There is almost nothing to do over the first half of this side of the book, and you can find yourself on long stretches where no decisions need to be made. Oftentimes, even when you are required to make a decision, it turns out to be meaningless.


I just couldn't get behind or even remotely enjoy playing as this total scumbag, and along with subpar writing and railroady choices, is why I have the score down here.


If an author wishes to write a historical novel then good luck to them. Do it. 
But these are meant to be gamebooks, with choices and gameplay and whatnot. 

Such a gamebook written by someone with...
1) an excellent knowledge of the historical period,
2) A good imagination and able to create a number of branching narratives,
3) An ability to incorporate the gaming aspects into the book

...ought to be a winner.

But i reckon you need all three.

[a moderator]

Aug 20, 2023 15:05:51 GMT bloodbeasthandler said:

I have NEVER seen one of these books 'in the wild', neither when they first came out in the shops nor second hand since. 
Outside of ebay and the library round where CharlesX lived... has anyone else seen them?

I definitely saw some of them in bookshops in the 1980s - indeed, I got a copy of Madame Guillotine from the bookshop that was across the road from Tunbridge Wells railway station during a sale.

I found something like half a dozen of them in different charity shops in the noughties. None that I can recall more recently, but I've been less inclined to keep a look-out for them since discovering how railroady Mr Sutherland gets.