It is time to give Last Train Home its due. And I will shoot straight from the hip: would I recommend this game?
As you can see, the thumb is up, so that should say it all.
But there is another criterion: would I play it again?
And on that score, I already did several times, so there is that.
While the game is not perfect, it has a lot to offer, and it balances an interesting narrative with varied gameplay. Let’s dig in a little and look at two aspects. The gameplay and the narration.
The game puts you in charge of a group of Czech soldiers stranded in Russia at the end of WWI. These were part of a legion of volunteers fighting on the side of Russia, but now find themselves in the middle of a civil war with a wish to return home to their newly founded state: Czechoslovakia. The direction is not west, though, because the front is in the way, so it is east through Siberia towards Vladivostok, braving cold, shortages, and enemies. The method is by train, which is your mobile base.
You start out with almost nothing and then have to survive the journey by a balancing act. You can send out groups of soldiers to gather provisions and other necessities or to do battle. Battles give you a lot of essential resources, but come with dangers. Provisioning is often only effective by people with special skills that are rare. There is one soldier with a herbalist skill, which is essential if you want to make food and money.
As you travel east, the game becomes harder. The winter gets colder, the resources scarcer, and the enemies more plentiful and more lethal. How you handle this is up to you. You can skip non-essential battles if you do not want to fight. You can even go in, collect resources, and go out without doing the primary objectives. The game even has settings if you prefer one gameplay style over another. I only played one style, so I cannot tell you about it. There are also different routes, with one favoring combat and the other favoring sourcing. The game therefore allows you to choose what to do or not, most of the time.
The battles themselves are varied. You have different versions: seize and hold, defend, attack, infiltrate, and escort. Sometimes a sudden event will occur, and you have to act, or not. Intercept a transport supplying the artillery or blow up this bridge to stop reinforcements. It is up to you.
But the gameplay is not all sunbeams. For instance, you have five types of soldiers, but the scout is obviously the most powerful. You might even say: overpowered. At higher levels, it becomes invisible to the enemy, allowing you to infiltrate and kill-sneak through the game. The only time you need another type is when you have to face waves of enemies. So then you turn to the machine gunner. The other three types you do not really need, and also, they can be taken as a secondary class, so you can have a scout with hand grenades or healing. And if you add a gun carriage to the train, you can have artillery when things become too hot.
Now let’s turn to the narration, which has its good and bad aspects. Here it is where the game meets history, and here is where the game shines and mishandles history.
The good part is the storyteller. This is done by Captain Langer, who is actually played by an actor in important cut-scenes. He is your advisor, and he will feature in various scenes. Using an actual actor gives a lot of realism to the game.
Also, engaging are the narrative elements. There is a story about a mysterious family that you have to take with you. It might have been the family of the Czar, but it is never said in full. There is a funny story about meeting Baba Yaga, which is told through the train. There are moments when you make decisions that are not always clear. Will you buy the special rifle some random stranger offers you? Will you offer the promised resources to the White general or tell him to go to hell? There is a mission where you have to capture a gold train within a certain time span for an ally.
While the narration is great, it also has its lesser moments. The worst offense is the portrayal of the warring parties. The Czechs are depicted as the ‘good’ guys, and everyone else is shady, evil, or a victim. The game has it that the others were split into two factions: the Whites, untrustworthy, and the Reds, the evil enemy. This is such a misrepresentation of history that it takes the game down a notch. For instance, a running theme is the Reds squeezing their own population for resources. It is an injustice considering that most of these ‘Reds’ in Siberia were actual Social Revolutionaries who were not Bolshevik and were supported by the rural population because their main policy was to reform the land and give it to the farmers. So having them squeeze their own people is just wrong. The same goes for the ‘Whites’. Many of the opponents of the ‘Reds’ were merely ‘Whites’ because they were not ‘Reds’; there were many groups that fought and allied in a bewildering and ever-changing pattern of coalitions and wars. Some wanted to create an independent state, not support the central government. They were basically anti-white but not 'Red'. This was, in fact, the reason the Czech Legion could have such an impact in this situation and the reason the Bolsheviks eventually won that civil war. The enemies of the Bolsheviks were divided. And so, the Legion punched well above its weight because it was well-equipped, battle-hardened, and centrally led.
By misrepresenting this part of history, I think the game does an injustice not just to the Russians but also to the Czechs. A more complex background might have been confusing to some, but it would explain why the legion was an effective force and how they had to handle the different factions.
However, if you keep in mind that this game isn’t a lesson in history and merely gives you a sense of it, then I feel it isn’t a big issue.
I think a game worth playing; just take its take on history with a grain of salt.
