Why do we play boardgames when PC games are available on the same topic?

[Double Deuce]

When I play solitaire, I always play by vassal.  Just because I don't have a good place to keep a game board out, unmolested. 

That's the main reason I play SASL using VASL instead of on the table. I would prefer the hard copy but having to leave it up with cats and kids would never work if its gotta sit out overnight.

[Jack Nastyface]

Good topic...wish we had used this one for a GameTalk! thread...
I think my decision to either board-or-pc game is driven by what kind of experience I am looking for.  The tactical, first-person experience I get from a good PC flight sim trumps pretty much every "detailed" board game on the same subject.  On the other hand, if I want a simple - dare I say arcade-y - plane-v-plane experience, I'd much rather break out Wings of War or C21.
At other times, the time factor is a big influence.  If I need some quick-and-dirty squad level action, I will almost always fire up Squad Battles or perhaps Close Combat or the 'puter version of Heroes of Stalingrad.  However, if I have time for a slightly longer experience, I go to Day of Heroes, etc.
Grand strategy wargames - for me at least - always remain PC based.  I just don't have the time or space to set up a monolithic game of anything.  The PC lets me experience that fairly well...

[Mad Russian]

I have either developed or help to develop both board and computer wargames. To me they are different animals. It's somewhat like being sent to the store to buy a bag of candy.

Once you get to the store you have a tremendous number of choices. You want chocolate candies, those with peanuts, those without, hard, soft, etc....

Board and computer games fall into that same kind of dilemma for me.

Do I want a game that is primarily solitaire, that I don't have to worry about the rules, does it need to be 'fixed' with a house rule, do the graphics and map create an immersion, etc.

We buy the two different types of game for entirely different reasons. Which allows for owning and or playing games in both genre.

The primary reason I will play a computer game is the AI and the fact the rules are set and not open to interpretation. The primary reason I play board games is that I can house rule the game if it has a glaring issue and the interaction with the other gamer. I will play computer games solitaire but not boardgames. And the list goes on....

Good Hunting.

MR

[PerryA]

I prefer board games because I can add house rules.  I read a great deal of military history and if I feel the game does not match my mental picture, I add with house rules.

But for playing very long games like MMP's OCS, I much prefer vassal.  I do not have to leave anything setup and I can make my move in peace without boring my opponent to death.

[Rex Brynen]

I play manual and digital wargames in completely different ways--even if they are on the same topic.

Manual wargames are a social experience, in which the interaction with the other players is a large part of the enjoyment. I like multiplayer games, or even 2-player games played in teams. We trash talk each other. We have loud thematic music playing in the background (I even have an old mac set up as a digital jukebox with period playlists in my gaming room). We've been known to make sound effects when things get blown up. Playing Ride of the Valkyries or Magic Carpet Ride is almost obligatory when conducting airstrikes in Fire in the Lake, for example.

When playing digital games, I always play solo, and I treat it in a much more analytical, puzzle-solving way. The pleasure here isn't derived from interaction with my rival, but from the intellectual puzzle of achieving my objective.

[Tinkershuffle]

Like for many others the most important thing for me also is the social aspect. I'm one of the lucky ones who have a regular gaming group/club.

I also find boardgames with all their cardboard chits, counters and pieces very relaxing to play. If I have to stare at the computer screen the whole day at work, I much rather do something else with my free time.

[Cyrano]

I confess that I find myself very pleased by this discussion.  Not only for the answers, but for a conversation that gives the lie to the notion that discussion on the internet cannot be civil and thoughtful.

If I can aggregate the responses, then, we play a boardgames when PC games are available on the same topic because:

1.  Humans are social beasts:  Certainly stipulated, and it's probably why so many of us make our way to national conventions like Historicon, CSW, &c., viz.:  we're not fortunate enough to have a game group locally that's willing to put up with learning, say, OCS.

2.  The aesthetic:  Here I have no riposte other than the convenience factor.  Big, lovely maps and pretty chits are fine things indeed.

3:  The tactile factor:  I certainly understand this, but how much of this is nostalgia?  Do 20-somethings say the same?  I honestly don't know.

4:  All equal, PCs are, for some, "work" things and we'd prefer to disassociate ourselves from them as we play.

I must dissent -- and I acknowledge that this is courses for horses -- from the desireability of house ruling.  First, all games -- and I am perhaps perversely absolutist about this -- must be played first as given.  I even dislike playing with optional rules out of the box.  I believe each game designer is trying to make an argument, a point, and it should be heard, for good or ill, as made.  Once the argument has been heard and deliberated, I tend to either embrace the argument or, if the deficiencies are great ones, walk away entirely.  I have far too many games to put up with poor design.  Worse, house rules break up the community surrounding games in a way that a niche like wargaming can poorly afford.  I have been at conventions -- albeit miniature gaming conventions -- where events didn't even start on time because players and the umpire were arguing about why certain house rules should be used or not.  Heck, you can get into quite a fuss about which optional rules to use in Tiller's various games and those aren't wired into the game until after an awful lot of deliberation and debate.

I now have TWO, not one but TWO, other questions I wish to post shortly stemming from all this...have to get my post count up somehow...

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[bayonetbrant]

not only do you have two more questions, but you need to figure out how to get that  extensive Facebook discussion moved over here so you only have to check things in one place

[Toonces]

First, all games -- and I am perhaps perversely absolutist about this -- must be played first as given.  I even dislike playing with optional rules out of the box.  I believe each game designer is trying to make an argument, a point, and it should be heard, for good or ill, as made.  Once the argument has been heard and deliberated, I tend to either embrace the argument or, if the deficiencies are great ones, walk away entirely.

I actually feel this way about PC games as well.  I strongly prefer to play a game unmodded at least the first time through (eg. Skyrim, Silent Hunter series, Total War series).  I feel like the designers have a way they want me to experience the game and I shouldn't muck around with that until I've seen their version of the game through.

[mirth]

For me, there is no greater gaming pleasure than to face off against my opponents across a table. In addition to the already mentioned social aspects (who doesn't like hanging out with their buds for a few hours?), I enjoy the challenge of playing face-to-face, judging my opponents reactions, trying to get in their heads a bit while keeping them out of mine.

I play with a great group of guys who are all very bright and competitive. Much of the fun we all derive from the experience is the "game within the game". Trying to psyche each other out a bit, recognizing each others strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies and then trying to make it use of it during the game (in a friendly way).

[Cyrano]

I will not, Brant, be held accountable for your wanton cross-posting.

Sweet fancy Jeebus...

Best,

JIm
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[bayonetbrant]

I will not, Brant, be held accountable for your wanton cross-posting.

the intent was to bring some of that traffic over here.

the effect however, was far different, though still interesting

[Cyrano]

Having now had a chance to wade through the responses, my only amendment would be adding the notion that some boardgamers really like the ability to see what's going on "under the hood" which, they feel, PC games can deny them, either due to complexity (WITE?) or design (any number of games).  I wonder how much of this relates to a deep-seated, lizard-brain type suspicion that the PC is "cheating", even in its generation of random numbers.  I'm not talking here about "full-knowledge" cheating like the A.I. from "Warlords" 100 years ago, but a sneaking suspicion that the PCs dice are just a bit loaded...if only because we can't see them bounce about our table top.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[Bison]

I just like the idea of physically touching the maps and counters.  Also it's relaxing to not stare at a computer screen and just cut out and clip counters.  I need to find me a union job clipping counters.

[Nefaro]

Having now had a chance to wade through the responses, my only amendment would be adding the notion that some boardgamers really like the ability to see what's going on "under the hood" which, they feel, PC games can deny them, either due to complexity (WITE?) or design (any number of games).  I wonder how much of this relates to a deep-seated, lizard-brain type suspicion that the PC is "cheating", even in its generation of random numbers.  I'm not talking here about "full-knowledge" cheating like the A.I. from "Warlords" 100 years ago, but a sneaking suspicion that the PCs dice are just a bit loaded...if only because we can't see them bounce about our table top.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

Perhaps.  But I think it's a case of basic curiosity of how something works.

It's also probably a (sub)conscious desire to create boardgames.  By becoming familiar with boardgame mechanics you can get right down to sampling a variety of methods and concepts,  what you like or dislike, and how they can be used to model stuff with little fuss.  A bit of an education in raw game mechanics and individual "flow".  I found coding on computers mind numbingly boring, and distracting from such things, with what little experience I had with it.