Jump to content

Talk:Choose Your Own Adventure/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bibliography

[edit]

What about the My First Adventure books? I recall there being one or two of these. Very cute.

History Section

[edit]

Melissa, an employee of current publisher of the CYOA books, is concerned about the information in the History section of this article. She considers it "sensitive" and would "prefer to keep some of this sensitive info from public disclosure." Please see User_talk:69.54.19.222 for the original discussion.

Shannon Gilligan, of chooseco, left me a phone messsge on 8/11/2006 in which she expressed more concerns about the accuracy of the pre-2000 history information in the article. Steve 15:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In which book does the protagonist become the villain?

[edit]

Does anyone know which book ("at least one") contains an ending in which the protagonist (i.e. the reader) becomes the villain? That piqued my curiosity but so far I have not been able to find out online which one it is.

OK this entry is undated so I may be replying to an ancient post, but...
I think it was called Last Run, with the hero either dying or becoming a high-paid henchman to the villains. I think I remember it was about snowboarding (skiing?), and there were NO happy endings... I paged through that book for hours. Eventually I read every page from beginning to end. No happy endings, alas. WolfieInu 21:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, then, that would be book 153, Last Run, by R. A. Montgomery. It was released on 1994. Here's its cover (courtesy of Gamebooks) - Last Run. --Ichoosemyadventure 06:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes that's it. My nemesis ;) . Thanks -- WolfieInu 11:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also in Space Vampire, one ending has you become a vampire and travelling to a colony to "feast" on it's inhabitants. As well as in "War With The Evil Power Master" you can join forces with him if you choose. TyVulpine (talk) 02:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Young Indiana Jones CYOA Series?

[edit]

I'm not seeing a mention of any of the Young Indiana Jones COYA books here... I know I had #2 (and I've got to find the title of it)... has anyone else seen those?

65.126.124.83 22:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added a note about infinite loops

[edit]

One feature I always remember about these books is getting thrown into loops where I reached the same page repeatedly. I added a note about this to the article. meshach 07:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

There were way too many external links in this article. Per WP:LINKS I have removed all the links to websites/programs that let you play a choose your own adventure "game" (pay or free). The article should just focus on providing information, not serve as an advertising launch pad. meshach 08:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True, but there are tons of other pages that link to similar sites relating to their respective topics. I'd say most of those link deleted were useless due more to the fact that they weren't really providing any more information and they also weren't really "CYOA" sites. Only a couple of the links actually went to a real CYOA site which were relevant to this topic. They shouldn't be deleted just because everyone else decided to start advertising.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.75.40.27 (talk • contribs).

The links appear to have been restored with a comment about not reducing competition. But they do not appear to be in keeping with our guidelines. I've taken sometime to look through all the links and propose the following:

If editor's ont' think Demian's site is suitable I think a single link to a neutral and comprehensive directory could be useful - I just don't think we should be that directory!

This would leave very little, and could even remove the entire section if Demian's site (or a replacement) isn't considered suitable. But at the moment the section is really just a directory (which Wikipedia is not) and encourages people to add marginal links. Cleaning it out would at least leave a fighting chance for any good links that do exist to be added and noticed by readers. Any comments? -- Siobhan Hansa 22:40, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may need cleanup,though I figure the descriptions due add some aid.Perhaps a link to an archive of CYOA sites?User:Serprex 14:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When you say an archive - would the Demian site be suitable? Or do you mean a link to a Wikipedia page of some sort? -- Siobhan Hansa 18:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I mean an archive of sites that have CYOA and stuff.Like what the external links are right now,an archive of CYOA related sitesUser:Serprex 00:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So is the [Demian site] suitable? Or do you know of another website with a better directory? -- Siobhan Hansa 21:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its good for CYOA info,but we should also include something like the IFarchiveUser:Serprex 01:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I may be missing something, but I couldn't find much information on this type of book there. It seems more appropriate for the Interactive fiction article (and I see it is listed there), which is about more than this genre of book. -- Siobhan Hansa 03:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True,perhaps we should add see also summaries and note the IFarchive there?User:Serprex 03:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK I'm trimming the links as mentioned above. If we find a better directory we can add or replace.
See also summaries make sense, so I'll have a go at that too, help appreciated. I'm not clear on why we would mentioning the IFarchive in the see also summaries - it really doesn't seem closely connected to the subject of this article. Do lots of readers come to this page when they are really looking for interactive fiction in general? If so we should perhaps make the interactive fiction article more prominent, but to promote an external link that isn't to do with tis article seems strange. -- Siobhan Hansa 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK having done this, I realized two things -

  1. I made an incorrect assumption when I first read the article. Because of the history section I thought this article was actually about the genre - not about this specific series. But the gamebook article covers the genre. So now I think the external links section should have Choose Your Own Adventure in Demian's Gamebook Webpage as a review/listings page (instead of the link to his front page) and we should add in the official CYOA site: Current publisher of Choose Your Own Adventure books (since our external links guidelines recommend linking to official sites of the subject of an article).
  2. The see also section has quite a few links to other individual series in this and similar genres. the similar genres seem good at the moment (though I haven't checked through to see that it's a manageable number) but the links to individual series' articles is poorly done. This sort of thing is better handled by categories so that there aren't lots of pages to update when a new article is added and we don't favor a few articles over others, just because someone found their way to this page and added it. The article is already subscribed to category:Choose Your Own Adventure, which is a sub-category of category:Gamebooks. I propose we get rid of the links to the articles on different series and put a link to the Gamebooks category in the see also section. This would link the article through the category page to all the books in the Gamebooks category and help readers find similar articles.

-- Siobhan Hansa 17:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems resonable enough.I do find the external link summary a little off though;"in existence"?User:Serprex 19:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. That wasn't the best. I've updated - hope the new wording reads better. -- Siobhan Hansa 19:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QED?User:Serprex 20:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infinite Story

[edit]

One of purposes of the Wiki is to direct to relevant sites for further information on a particular subject, well the site gives a good example of what CYOAs are and how they function. The site does this even better than the “official site” actually. I could also go on about there are tons of other Wiki pages that have just as many “dubious links” from their respective pages that barely have any real relevance to their topics (Unlike this one which does have relevance), but I’ll just focus on the subject at hand.

Quite frankly this page didn’t really have that many links to begin with when I first posted this link a long time ago, but it just so happened recently that all of a sudden everyone and their mother started dropping links on the page, so I understand the need for cutting out the crap ones. (Out of all of them that were cut, I might argue that only one other deserved to be up there, but that place isn’t my concern, they can get their own rep to argue their case)

If it looks like I’m showing favoritism for this one site, well of course I am. However, I do believe this site is just as relevant to CYOAs as the other two currently linked to are, especially since it’s actually giving users the ability to make their own. It’s probably the only place on the net that caters to CYOA writing on any meaningful level. If someone is at all interested in the topic it's certainly a site that's going to help someone out especially since if they have questions they're going to get feedback from a real live person. (Well as "real" as the internet gets anyway)

I don’t know, unless your main beef is that the site isn’t strictly connected with the actual brand name of “Choose Your Own Adventure” I don’t see the problem with having the link here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.72.98.85 (talk) 07:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

As you mention above, it isn't to do with the CYOA brand, which is what this article is about. Our guidelines explicitly state that links should be about the subject of the article, not some something related to the subject of the article. -- Siobhan Hansa 11:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Siobhan Hansa here. When the IP user states "One of purposes of the Wiki is to direct to relevant sites for further information on a particular subject", this couldn't be more wrong. In fact we explicitly states that Wikipedia is not a directory of external links. Even if this particular link was appropriate for some article its not appropriate for this one, as this is the article about this particular brand of gamebook. I am removing the link since its inappropriate. Please do not add it back. Thanks, Gwernol 11:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wild branching?

[edit]

Unlike certain other gamebooks, each individual book in this series does not take place in the same world. What this means is that different factual truths are revealed depending on the player's choice. For instance, by picking one choice, the player discovers that the cause of the "strangeness" is space aliens, but by picking another choice the player discovers a completely contradictory truth, e.g. that the "strangeness" is caused by a cabal of evil sorcerers. This structure differs markedly from that of many other game books (including the Fighting Fantasy ones), in which the different choices do not cause major changes to the world, and where most of the choices leads the player towards the same ending (in classical Fighting Fantasy, that'll be a sword-in-hand showdown against the main villain, e.g. Balthus Dire in Citadel of Chaos). The problem is, how to explain this properly? Especially since I have distinctly limited ability to admire the "method" of the CYOA books, as opposed to the various other gamebook series that I'm familiar with.--Peter Knutsen 23:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This probably could be integrated into the article...somewhere(and probably made more compact)User:Serprex 00:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about something like 'Unlike other gamebook series, the different narrative branches available do not always share the same continuity'? EvilRedEye 14:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CYOA and gamebooks as a genre

[edit]

I think certain aspects of this article are a little bit geared towards looking at CYOA as if it represents the entire genre of gamebooks. What I mean by that is that, for example, the format section (which I note does not contain any citations) reiterates a lot of stuff that's in the gamebook article (although it is more in the context of CYOA books so this isn't the best example). A better example is the 'Possible Derivation' section - this is also uncited, and in my opinion belongs in the gamebook article, not this one because whilst the information can be cited, I doubt it can be cited in a way that connects it directly to the CYOA series. In the 'Impact' section several books are mentioned that may have just been influenced by the general gamebook genre rather than CYOA - again, no citations are provided, although books like 'Choose Your Own Epic Adventure' are obviously inspired by this specific series. Also, the 'see also' section (which I've changed, moving several links to the general gamebook article) contained a lot of links about various kinds of interactive narrative, but CYOA is in itself not a type of interactive narrative - the gamebook genre is. EvilRedEye 13:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some Possible Changes by CYOA's owner/publisher Chooseco

[edit]

First, in the interest of being 100% transparent, the wikipedia user name "Chooseco" was created (and is utilized) by an employee of Chooseco LLC (my name is John, for the record)

That said, I want outline some items we were concerned with and changes we are considering making, before we do them in order to get people's thoughts.

Changes on the Table:

  • The History needs to be fixed a bit as we are not "planning" to release books in 2006, we did. We have more coming (both sundance and to the press) and want to make that clear and up to date.
  • Our new series of full color Choose Your Own Adventures for early readers called DragonLarks (they have been out for a few months) needs to be added.
  • We think "possible derivations" detracts from the article. I would say cut it, but if its a "must keep", I think moving it down to near "references", as it is not really CYOA series related. Genre, sure. book series, not so much.
  • This last one is the most controversial. Pure and simple, we have been swarmed by people who have no idea Choose is being republished. Wikipedia being the "go to" Reference on the web we looked at this entry and feel it does not prominently inform the average reader that the series is back and continuing. To that end, because the old series is static, and the new series is adding new books, we would like feature the new series a bit more prominently. Most importantly, we are thinking about putting one of the new covers up near the top (just below Cave of time perhaps), and perhaps move the new series above the old to increase accessibility.

These edits and our existence undoubtedly raises some questions about trying to use Wikipedia to sell more books, but thats not the intent here. I hope its clear that I want to help make this little corner of Wikipedia the best it can be, not an extension of our website. This page represents one of the first places people look (its higher on Google then our website!) for information on CYOA and so it should be a ready source of the most up to date info. That is our goal and intent.

So there it is. Thoughts?

--Chooseco 17:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you may have have already done so, but if not I strongly recommend you read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. One thing out of that list that I particularly agree with is the removal of the 'possible derivations' section since that material is covered in the gamebook article. My main worry is that the DragonLarks info could end up being thinly veiled advertising, but I really couldn't say more unless I saw the text you were planning to add. I really don't mind if you put a new cover at the top since, from what I know, they look virtually identical in style to the old ones anyway. As for moving material on the new stuff to the top... I'm not so sure about that. Do you mean simply moving the Adventure - Relaunch 2005 section of the list to the top of that part of the article? In any case I think the list of books should possibly be split into its own article at some point in the future anyway, since long lists don't really belong in encyclopaedia articles. EvilRedEye 18:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Response

[edit]

Hi John - I appreciate you checking with us about your changes. Here is my response:

  • History section- I changed the text to mention that the books are released.
  • DragonLarks - add a section at the bottom of the article- similar to Choose_Your_Own_Adventure#Adventure_-_Relaunch_2005. The list is in basically chronological ordrer, so the newst books would go at the end.
  • Derivation - personally, I say leave it. I liked reading about where the whole thing started.
  • Making new books more prominent -
    • I changed the first sentence to make it more clear that the books are currently being republished.
    • I agree that adding a re-launched book pic at the top is fine. However I disagree with altering the article to "feature the new series a bit more prominently". I understand that you may not be specifically trying to sell more books, but using wikipedia to advance a personal goal, such as calling attention to books you are publishing, is a conflict of interest.

Steve 20:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steve -- correct me if I'm wrong (actually, correct the article if it's wrong) but the "Possible Derivation" section doesn't tell "where it all started". What it presents is someone's theory -- i.e., original research -- about how it might have all started. I must say I find the theory improbable. Is it possible that American author Edward Packard could have somehow heard about the proceedings of a group of French experimental writers and been thereby influenced? Possible, yes. But not one piece of evidence is presented to indicate that this did happen. -- 192.250.34.161 21:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see that someone has now removed the section - I agree that it didn't have a reference source. It sounded valid to me as an origin of the enrire genre - I would have prefered for someone to add the source.Steve 21:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It needs sourcing as fact to stay. Given that it disclaimed itself as a possible origin, that seems unlikely; it sounds like OR to me. Xihr 00:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are sources on the French experimental stuff, but you'd need a source that linked it to CYOA in particular, and I doubt that one exists to be honest. Remember there's a separate article for the gamebook genre itself. EvilRedEye 08:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks all, it looks good. I am going to slide in the rerelease book cover up (Abominable) and tweak the Stonehenge date (It release date was pushed back) but thanks for feedback. Chooseco 10:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List split

[edit]

I think the list of books should be split into a stand-alone list. It's getting to the point where it dwarfs the rest of the article. As it stands most of the article is in list form rather than prose. The content of the list is great, I just think it's in the wrong place. EvilRedEye 15:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Similar to List of The Baby-sitters Club books. Steve 17:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't seem worth waiting so I've just gone ahead and done it. There's so much precedent, I can't imagine what valid objection there could be. EvilRedEye 19:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good call. It is much less... Massive. Chooseco 10:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The image Image:CH01 Abominable cover.HR.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New series - Golden Path

[edit]

Apparently Chooseco has decided to publish the first (from them) multi-book series, in which several narrative threads from the first book continue in the second, and so on. Sounds like fun; looks like a way to revitalize their market. --BlueNight (talk) 06:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New online choose your own adventure zombie movie: survivetheoutbreak.com

[edit]

A new online zombie movie, which allows the user to choose which path they want is available at: http://www.survivetheoutbreak.com/ Does anyone else know of anymore of these types of choose your own adventure movies? travb (talk) 02:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

But I'll include it here.----occono (talk) 00:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

recent edits- Geronima12

[edit]

Greetings all,

I recently had a whole series of edits undone by Geronima12, who additionally replaced the Cave of Time image at the top of the page with an image of a book from the re-released series. The other edits were all in a similar vein of minimizing Edward Packard's role in the series (or at least in the main paragraph) in what seems to be an attempt to keep a focus on the reprint series. One of the eliminations was Packard's creation of the series- I've added a citation, from the interior cover text to "Worst Day of Your Life."

This page is not an advertisement- it is an encyclopedic article on the Choose Your Own Adventure book and phenomenon. If Geronima12 would like to discuss the merits of his/her edits, I would be happy to do so, but I don't have the time or inclination to continually police this page for advertising.

Seanmercy (talk) 00:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just undid almost identical changes to lead by IP add 67.183.109.104- if you're reading this, please, let's hash out the lead here in discussion rather than going back and forth. I realize that you'd like to include R.A. Montgomery's name in the lead line- the question is how to work it in, and how to describe both his and Packard's contributions. It would help if you provided some sources as well, as I attempted to do by adding a reference to the text printed by Bantam in the interior of the 100th CYOA book, Worst Day of Your Life, where Packard is described as the creator of the series concept. There's some middle ground here, but we're not going to reach it without some type of discussion.Seanmercy (talk) 05:37, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a complex issue, and there's more than a little friction between them. The basic gist- Packard created the concept, wrote a manuscript, which was rejected all over the place, and finally published by Ray Montgomery's small press. Sales were poor- Packard moved on, trying and succeeding to sell a few books to a larger publisher. Meanwhile. R.A.M. took Packard's concept and shopped it around with his agent, who landed Bantam books. Someone then decided (either Bantam, Montgomery, his agent or Bantam's legal department- who knows) that they should include Packard, as the creator of the concept, in on the deal. Montgomery and Packard were both contracted to supply a certain amount of books- as the series grew more popular they each hired out other writers to supply manuscripts (so all of the other writers were either in the Packard camp or the Montgomery camp, hired by them and subcontracted). At some point the two had a personal falling out which neither of them has gone on record about. And a few years ago, Montgomery acquired the rights to the trademark "Choose Your Own Adventure", either by purchasing them, if you believe the Chooseco press releases, or by carefully watching expiration dates and filing intent papers, if you believe other sources.

So, how to synthesize all of this into a lead line? Someone in the Chooseco camp wants Montgomery's named in the lead. But Packard was consistently referred to as "the creator" of the CYOA in Bantam's promotional material, in their books, etc.

Lastly, I found at least two articles of recent vintage that are about the recent re-release of Montgomery's books that take the Chooseco version at face value, and don't mention Packard at all. I think it would be a mistake to take this ahistorical tack. Seanmercy (talk) 16:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OFFICE

[edit]

This article has been placed under WP:OFFICE protection pending reasonable accomodation with concerned parties that have contacted the office. This article is not to be edited, except by people who are expressly authorized by myself, the WMF General Counsel, or other authorized WMF Staff. The relevant policy is WP:OFFICE. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 01:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible that someone authorized fix the "Digital Versions" heading (lowercase "v") and properly cite the source at the end of that section? Or should it just be left there? /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Here's the full text of the interior cover of "The Worst Day of Your Life," published by Bantam in April 1990-

"THE FIRST TEN YEARS- Welcome to Book 100- Choose Your Own Adventure has been a successful series for more than ten years. It all started in 1969, when Edward Packard was telling a bedtime adventure story to his children. Growing tired himself, he paused to ask them what they thought the main character should do next in the story. From the answers his children gave, an idea began to form in Mr. Packard's mind. On the train to work the next day, he began fantasizing about what would happen if books could have more than one ending. Inspired, he wrote a multiple-storyline book starring "you," the reader. Mr. Packard called it The Adventures of You on Sugarcane Island.

At about the same time, R.A Montgomery was designing and writing educational role-playing simulation games for the Peace Corps in Washington, D.C. By 1975, he had become the publisher of a small press in northern Vermont. When he received Mr. Packard's first manuscript, Mr. Montgomery realized that the role-playing aspect of the book would be a strong motivational device for young readers. The manuscript was published, and became an instant success. Soon R.A. Montgomery and Edward Packard interested Bantam Books with the idea. The result is the Choose Your Own Adventure series.

Now, ten years and 100 books later, Edward Packard and R.A. Montgomery continue to write Choose Your Own Adventure books for you, the reader. We hope you continue to enjoy them."

Here's the interior text to the Bantam edition of "Sugarcane Island," written by Edward Packard, and textually and format-wise virtually identical to the initial published edition (see Demian Katz's website for comparison)

"Sugarcane Island was written in 1969 and first published by Vermont Crossroads Press. As far as we know it was the first book in which you the reader are the star of the story and make choices affecting the plot. Bantam is pleased to add it as the sixty-second book in the Choose Your Own Adventure series. Our new edition has been revised and expanded by the author, and includes 29 new illustrations!"


I see that the AP article Milowent references above has most of this information and more. Sorry for any redundancy. Seanmercy (talk) 04:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am willing to help out, but it would be useful to know what packard and montgomery or whoever are bitching about. Interested parties appeared to game this article in the past. This 1981 article (here's one copy of it [4]) was a national story and should be cited as a reliable source.--Milowent • talkblp-r 05:51, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here's[5] an example of a series of edits from October 2010 done to blatantly promote Montgomery over Packard, including replacing the example cover of the first book in the series (The Cave of Time) with a recent publication.--Milowent • talkblp-r 05:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to Edward Packard's entry on Contemporary Authors Online, which should be a definitive source. http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?&id=GALE%7CH1000075524&v=2.1&u=vill_main&it=r&p=LitRC&sw=w

Note the reference to the series and Packard in the possessive, as well as the detailed history. They also site multiple sources which could probably be mined for further information. Seanmercy (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Choose_Your_Own_Adventure/Archive_1&oldid=1089044225"