[Spoon]

Well yes, because in tabletop RPGs you run through all the numbers yourself and the process of calculation is engaging all by itself; in a computer RPG you're just watching as a bunch of stats get munched through an automated calculator and the numbers themselves aren't very interesting.

Okay so in your opinion the gameplay 'doesn't work'/isn't fun because you want to calculate THAC0 yourself instead of having the pc do it for you.
Rrrright o.
Well don't be suprised if you'll find the very vast majority of players disagree with you there!

[The E]

I don't know, I find the process of computing all the various factors that go into an attack roll in D20 (Even Pathfinder's streamlined version of it) to be easily the worst part of a combat round. As thrilling as the tactical decisions and the ultimate resolution of your actions are, the computations necessary (what with all the various effects that could be in place at any given time) are just tedious.

As such, games like NWN or KOTOR allow me to make the decisions I want to make without having to worry about summing it all up, which I think is great.

[Phantom Hoover]

Right, but they're still automating a system of game mechanics designed to be manually computed by humans. Newer games generally use mechanics designed from scratch to be calculated without human oversight, which is why older, tabletop-based RPGs are showing their age. That was my point.

[NGTM-1R]

Right, but they're still automating a system of game mechanics designed to be manually computed by humans. Newer games generally use mechanics designed from scratch to be calculated without human oversight, which is why older, tabletop-based RPGs are showing their age.

Ironically this sounds more like an argument for a Rolemaster conversion than it does an argument against a D&D conversion. (Last line omitted because it following hasn't been established.)

[Spoon]

Right, but they're still automating a system of game mechanics designed to be manually computed by humans. Newer games generally use mechanics designed from scratch to be calculated without human oversight, which is why older, tabletop-based RPGs are showing their age. That was my point.

I can't wrap my head around your argument. It makes zero sense to me. (I also feel like you are sorta backpedalling here but hey.)
Let's take Baldurs Gate for example. It's gameplay based on 2nd edition D&D, a ruleset notorious for its bookkeeping requirements. (Case in point, THAC0, a horrible ineffective method to determine if you hit something or not)
BG is heralded by many as one of the best RPG's of all times. What has truly aged badly about this game? Presentation&Graphics? Definitely. The pathfinding of your party is clunky and you'll spend quite a bit of time waiting before your party has gathered before you are allowed to venture forth. The character sprites are not exactly abudantly animated or overly detailed either.

But gameplay? Not at all. The spells and counter spells have a nice depth and complexity to them. You can complete the game solo if you like the challenge instead of with a party. Every class is viable with their own strengths and weaknesses (some classes can get slightly out of control, but overall the balance is pretty good). The vast majority of what makes 2nd edition so cumbersome is handled by the game behind the scenes. It works excellently and its one of the reasons why the game is so good. Age has absolutely no influence on this, its a timeless classic. One I've already replayed twice.

Now Dragon Age origins:
Another excellent game, much more recent and big budget and it really shows in the presentation. But as much as I enjoyed the game, I wasn't feeling really engaged by the gameplay mechanics itself. I found myself repeating a certain pattern for each fight (it involved a lot of AOE spells) and I really felt restricted in my party choice because magic (AOE) was so needed for each fight. Couldn't leave the camp with at least one spellcaster! I really liked the game but it is unlikely that I'll be replaying the game any time soon.

Now by your 'logic', Dragon age will somehow age more gracefully because the damage numbers behind the scenes are calculated by a system that was 'designed from scratch to be calculated without human oversight'. How does this even make sense? You are literally the first person I've ever heard make such a wierd statement.
It's not the actual gameplay, not the content, not the graphics, ui or presentation. No, it's because the damage calculations done by the engine are based on a tabletop ruleset. 

[Phantom Hoover]

comparing two specific examples does not disprove the general point

[Spoon]

There is no point to disprove. Your 'point' is nothing more than your opinion, it is not a widely accepted fact.
It doesn't even make sense to begin with so yeah. 

[AdmiralRalwood]

comparing two specific examples does not disprove the general point

No, it doesn't, but since the "general point" has never been proven...

Can you provide any counter examples? Because Baldur's Gate 2 seems to have held up extremely well, in my opinion.

[deathfun]

Anyone consider that if a game is fun, it's a game that has stood the test of time?

[Luis Dias]

Right, but they're still automating a system of game mechanics designed to be manually computed by humans. Newer games generally use mechanics designed from scratch to be calculated without human oversight, which is why older, tabletop-based RPGs are showing their age. That was my point.

I think that what's missing in this point (and I agree with everyone who's argued against you in it) is the simple fact that "rolling dices" is just a necessity that board games have of introducing a randomizer in the game to make it more interesting, risky and surprising. There's nothing in "rolling dices" that is gameplayworthy except for that randomness in the first place. If computers do that for you, the "dice" is obviously obsolete. For instance, imagine these devs were so mesmerized about dices as you apparently are, they could well make you roll a virtual dice in front of the event each time it would be required.

But apparently, this detail was rarely if ever introduced at any RPG or any other game (I do remember playing virtual monopoly once where this practice existed). The reason is that this randomization is a technical requirement, not a part of the gameplay, of the fun. The fun is in the actual rational (or not) choices that the players make in the game.

Scratch all that, I missed your point completely. I now understand what you are saying. Old "tabletop games" are using the same maths and algorithms that actual tabletops used, in a kitsch obsolete manner. IDK if this issue is a real sore to the experience, but I now understand the point.

[NGTM-1R]

Old "tabletop games" are using the same maths and algorithms that actual tabletops used, in a kitsch obsolete manner. IDK if this issue is a real sore to the experience, but I now understand the point.

That's not an argument, though, that's a statement. It's not even a good statement of fact, because it's wrapped in an opinion.

What's the desired outcome here? Is Phantom Hoover arguing that a mechanized tabletop system is too streamlined or not streamlined enough? Is the point that a computer can include a more complex and well-designed granular rules system because it automates this sort of thing? Is the point that this sort of randomization is bad for RPGs? What sort of tabletop system is even being discussed, are we talking about White Wolf "those dice get in the way of my LARP, man!" or something rules-heavy and roll-heavy like Rolemaster?

[Phantom Hoover]

All I'm saying is that they're two different kinds of game and so have two different sets of requirements; and so using tabletop mechanics in a computer game is more obviously dated (because using proven techniques from an old medium in a new one is a natural starting point) than using 'computerised' mechanics.

(N.B. I may have implicitly or explicitly made stronger statements earlier in this thread; this was mostly due to inarticulacy on my part.)

[Husker]

World of Warships. 'Nuff said. At least for me.

[Scourge of Ages]

World of Warships. 'Nuff said. At least for me.

It's out? How is it?

[Husker]

Not yet, silly. but it will be out in 2014.

[Scourge of Ages]

Whoops, thought this was "What are you playing now"

[Husker]

That's ok. I take it you're interested?

[deathspeed]

Dogfight alpha should be January or something. That should be fun.

I can't find anything about this game.  Well, I found a lot of games, but none coming out in 2014.  Do you have a link for more info?

[Phantom Hoover]

he means the star citizen dogfight alpha

[deathspeed]

Oh, duh!     Thanks!!