Face it people. Skyrim isn't cRPG at all.

[JesterRaiin]

Sorry guys, different timezone.

Yes, lets make every game exactly the same as real life.

Not fond of reading earlier posts, aren't we ?

How about you learn how to make your original post [YOU KNOW, THE POST THAT MATTERS MOST?] make SENSE?

Yea, that's one of numerous approaches. However you're losing something in the process. Same way with playing Skyrim just like your typical Diablo or other hack and slashers.

OT : About realism.

(snip)

Can you make up your damn mind on where your arbitrary trollstance is going to be before you waste my time, please? Further, what in the however-many hells do you mean when you say cRPG? You're using the term which expands to 'computer Role Playing Game,' but then you compare it to tabletop role playing games. Which are, as is apparent to anyone with even a modicum of knowledge about the two, as you seem to be, entirely different genres. I don't even care about whether your argument works. I'm too caught up in this incomprehensible mess of contradictory stances and misused terminology.

Ah flexibility, the lost muse of discussions.
Like almost everything also "realism" has some degrees. I'm strongly against 100% hardcore realism in videogames, since it would change whole experience into, you know, actual life. Then again, you no doubtly know some critically acclaimed fantasy movies like Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones tv series or even Star Wars (space fantasy, but still), right ? It's exactly the kind of realism i'm interested in. Heroes with shiny armors and powerful swords, magic and epic tales. Then again, you never see them taking a dump, or making angry commentaries about being on period or stuff.
RPG and cRPG ? Same roots, different branches, still it's the same tree, so i don't know what's your point is. Purpose of cRPGs is to recreate one day full RPG experience. Skyrim is (debatable) currently as close to fullfiling this purpose as possible and that's the bottom line.
Now, was that difficult ?

Try to recreate living person. Just for the sake of fun ? Isn't that why you're playing it in the first place ?

.....To recreate a living person? no . I never thought I would play skyrim with the intention of doing things that I could and have to easily do in real life

Skipped a few meals ? Know that feeling of overwhelming hunger ?

Yes but WHO WANTS TO DEAL WITH THAT IN A GAME? It's one thing if it's fallout new vegas and survival is supposed to be an integral part of the game, and it legitimately is a problem of sorts at times, but in skyrim there is no reason for food ever to be a problem for you.

Actually there were mods for that for both Morrowind and Oblivion. They were fun, since they added a need to look for a place to sleep, something to fill the stomach, drinks.
I remember also one special mod that added effects of temperatures to some more places. Without going into details, i hope you climbed stairs to this, uhhhh, fortress of grey bearded grandpas ? Everyone around is talking how big this thing really is. I got the impression that it's some kind of Hajj or something. Sure, i lost my way one or two times, had a little sparring on the way, but altogether - it wasn't that difficult. Then i thought "man, if this would be a little closer to the true world, i would panic that i'll freeze to death or something". And i immediately thought about this "temperature" mod.
Curently Skyrim doesn't support it, but believe me, it would be fun.

Still...
Look. There's no way to recreate tabletop, "Pen and paper" rpg experience on computers.

No shit, P&P RPG's rely on face-to-face multiplayer interaction and are, basically, only a very barebones ruleset with which the players themselves create a universe to play in.

Not exclusively. There are rpg systems without DM/Keeper character, there are paragraph rpgames. This industry is ont he market since ancient times, so there are systems covering pretty much every way one would like to play those games.

I could never play pen and paper DnD but my friend said you could pretty much change the rules to what you wanted. Add your own custom spells and everything if you cared to, and the dm allowed it.

Guess I was under the wrong impression

No, your impression was good, however if there's too much to change, it's better to look for alternatives instead of investing time and energy into the process. For example, "default setting" in D&D is what now ? "Forgotten Realms" ? Let's say you're thinking "how great it would be to have some crude, giant, walking machines, just like Mechs from Battletech games - that would rock !" And sure, you may spend 100s of hours trying to invent rules for that, making it believable and stuff. Then again, why not try "Iron Kingdoms", game with setting that deals with this topic by default ?
So yes, you can, and no, it's not worth your time in some cases.

I got your attention ? Good. Sorry for this little manipulation, i hope you're forgiving one.

(snip)
Do pen and paper games provide a different experience? Without question. But that does not mean that experience is superior and when the crpg space is itself so varied it makes it impossible to make the argument that just because a computer version doesn't match some particular interpretation of the crpg experience it doesn't deserve to be called an RPG.

Nicely done sir, however i can't agree. What you said would be plausible if there would be only one and single rpg on the market - D&D (and while at that, i'm talking about latest, VERY tactical edition). We have literally hundreds, thousands even (home brewed) systems with different mechanics, settings, approaches, purposes and aiming at different audiences.

You disregarded "dynamic story generating" and that's the one, solely point why i value RPGs that much and find it not importnat, not vital, but inseparable basis of whole RPG experience. With that in mind, i can without any doubt still hold my point : as for today cRPGs aren't able to recreate tabletop experience. Not yet.

OT : People, i'm shocked. http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/ has 1470 Core Books in its database. Let's say it's full 1000 of different rpg systems and all you can say regarding tabletop RPGs is D&D ? What about Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu, Star Wars, Warhammer/Warhammer 40k, Shadowrun, Gurps, Fading Suns, World of Darkness ?

That is because D&D is, by far, the most well known.
(snip)

Sure it is !
However it's not that D&D defines the way RPG really is and how it should be played. Nope.
It was always more combat- than storytelling- oriented system, and this approach alone divides players into two roughly equal factions. True, there's storytelling in D&D. True, with some effort one is able to recreate let's say Lovecraftian atmosphere of unknown, alien horror while still roaming wilderness of Toril, but that doesn't change the way things are : D&D is rpg system, but it's not wholeness of RPG.

And once again, true, there are some of best cRPGs "ever", that take place in one of D&Ds settings, but have you ever wondered why ? Is it because D&D as a whole is best there is, or maybe because of its easy and flexible mechanics ? Or maybe because you can't use Planescape setting without using D&D system ? Or simply, maybe designers agreed that this kind of story/adventure/scenario/campaign that they had in mind would perfectly fit one of numerous D&D settings ?

Point is : i don't think that your argumentations (although very interesting) changes anything i wanted to express here in this thread. Thanks anyway.

(snip)

The point I'm getting at here, is I *already* treat Skyrim (and any other RPG) as a legitimate ROLE playing game, where I can take on a persona and explore a new world using that persona. And I know I'm not the only one who does.

Glad to hear that, good job, but this thread isn't for you i guess.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

What are you on? When I used to play AD&D I'd play for the hardcore dungeoneering and killing things. Not the crap you described.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

I got your attention ? Good. Sorry for this little manipulation, i hope you're forgiving one.

Of course, Skyrim BELONGS to Computer Role-Playing Game genre. However :
1. Not exclusively.
2. You play it in wrong way. No. Really. Sure, you beat the main quest. Sure, you're Skyrim's version of Commander Sheppard. Sure, everyone loves you and you saved whole world. That's one way to play this game, and i applaud you for doing it like you did. Good job !

Still...
Look. There's no way to recreate tabletop, "Pen and paper" rpg experience on computers.
With technological boom that's happening since people harnessed power of silicon it will be possible in let's say 50 years since now.

But as for today, Skyrim is as close to real RPGaming as it is possible. Here's the trick : Bethesda gave you the product that is more or less world and/or hero simulator. Sure, you may do some things easy way, but... Try to recreate living person. Just for the sake of fun ? Isn't that why you're playing it in the first place ?

So. There may be no rules for that, but have you ever tried to cross the river in iron armor weighing more than a few pounds ? Think, how long could you run in arctic environment, possibily wearing only bikini and 20 variations of Orcish Greatsword ? Skipped a few meals ? Know that feeling of overwhelming hunger ? How about your relationships, were you ever involved in real male to female, ahem, union ?

TES Construction is on the way. People will, no doubtly provide us with mods that will change Skyrim into something completely different. In the meantime : how about just pretending, trying ? It's what we, gamers, do in our quest for immersion...

i am dumbfounded.
you are clearly insane.
and VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS ARE ALL COMPUTERS.

quit whining and go back to AD&D

 

[VoidWanderer]

But as for today, Skyrim is as close to real RPGaming as it is possible. Here's the trick : Bethesda gave you the product that is more or less world and/or hero simulator. Sure, you may do some things easy way, but... Try to recreate living person. Just for the sake of fun ? Isn't that why you're playing it in the first place ?

...

Wow... If YOU want to play a game that recreates living people, try the Sims games.

Me, if I am playing a COMPUTER game where the RPG is run by the crusiest DM, as long as I enjoy the game, I don't care about hunger and thirst meters and 'realism'.

My counterpoint? If I am playing a game where I am wielding magical powers, I am not so fussed about eating. I don't play games to simulate real life. If I wanted to do that, I would do that 'Life' thing my parents keep hassling me about.

 

[Kurokami]

I never really understood the concept of immersion.

Why would I ever want a game to simulate real-life? Would that mean I'd have to stay in 2-hour long car-queues in GTA? That, in TES, I'd spend most of my time walking around my town talking to my neighbours? Or perhaps in Fallout, that'd I'd settle down and find a nice place to live out the apocalypse?

That sounds very immersive, but incredibly boring.

To be fair, I prefer fun games to realistic games. Then again, perhaps that's why I prefer strategy games.

Immersion =/= realism, it just means feeling as though you're in the game.

IE: Running around pressing the right trigger to hit shit can be fun, feeling as though you're running around like a badass hitting shit, that's more fun, I find.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Who cares what acronym it fits?

All I care about is that it's fun. Which it is.

 

[Chalacachaca]

How do you play RPGs with a PAN and paper?

Meet my buddy PAN.

http://www.moviemobsters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pan-2.jpg

Fair enough. But you do know that Pan is this one, right?

But neither of those are Pan! (that's actually Fauno), this is Pan:

I hope I cleared that up and we can now close this thread.

 

[JesterRaiin]

i am dumbfounded. you are clearly insane. and VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS ARE ALL COMPUTERS.
quit whining and go back to AD&D

Ooooooooooooh, how do i love those meaningles insults not backed up by single coherent argument !
Have some cookie. Cookies are the best medicine. So i was told.

But as for today, Skyrim is as close to real RPGaming as it is possible. Here's the trick : Bethesda gave you the product that is more or less world and/or hero simulator. Sure, you may do some things easy way, but... Try to recreate living person. Just for the sake of fun ? Isn't that why you're playing it in the first place ?

Wow... If YOU want to play a game that recreates living people, try the Sims games.

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. I never liked the idea of being omnipotent peeper.

Me, if I am playing a COMPUTER game where the RPG is run by the crusiest DM, as long as I enjoy the game, I don't care about hunger and thirst meters and 'realism'.

My counterpoint? If I am playing a game where I am wielding magical powers, I am not so fussed about eating. I don't play games to simulate real life. If I wanted to do that, I would do that 'Life' thing my parents keep hassling me about.

Oh c'mon. All i'm saying is "add another layer of immersion to this experience". There's no need to recreate each and every activity we do here, especially since this "life" here takes place in different setting than Skyrim.

(snip)
Look. There's no way to recreate tabletop, "Pen and paper" rpg experience on computers.
With technological boom that's happening since people harnessed power of silicon it will be possible in let's say 50 years since now.
(snip)

Dwarf Foress's adventure mode did all of that more or less with no problem.

We can make a perfect RPG, but no big company would try it. The only ones who have the resources to do that would be valve and they are busy trying to appease fanboys.

I'm not sure what part of my post you were adressing to exactly, but i guess it was this one. Correct me if i'm wrong (and of course if you care .

While DF has its special place in my heart, it's not able to recreate "PnP experience". Problem is - what does it mean to each and every one of us ? I agree - if someone regards rpging as "fun thing you do with friends in imaginary world with given set of rules", then, hell, there are MMORPGs that do the job. However i'm looking for something different.

But, as i stated it before in this thread, the most important part of Role Playing games for me is storytelling, or "dynamic story generating". There's no way for computers to do that right now. Even in games like Skyrim and WoW people can't change the world that surrounds them in more ways that were preprogrammed.

I'll give you an example (i know your face, i know you're aware of what i'm talking about, but it's for the sake of discussion) : back in old times we were playing Ultima online. At first there weren't any vampires there and people amused by idea of being one just pretended that they crave for blood, have to avoid light and such.
Others founded faction that tried to resurrect the Dark Lord and acted accordingly to their creed event hought it was impossible to do - there were no scripts in game world for this.
Yet, we had fun, oh hell, was it fun !

This nice man here :

TL;DR: My take on what OP was saying is: If you haven't already, try to roleplay a certain type of character in Skyrim. Be a drunken Barbarian. Be a crazed serial killer who likes to put poisons into the inventories of the people of an entire village so they slowly die off one by one but nobody can figure out why. Hell, be Batman for all I care. I once roleplayed Stranger from Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath in Morrowind, and had a great time (Plus everyone already called me Stranger in their stadardised voiced greetings).

...summed in pretty, efficient words everything i wanted to suggest with this thread. (Thanks Sennz0r)
Do it like you want to do people, if ultimate realism is your thing, try it, if you're like me and like survival, then go for it, if knighthood is your thing and you want to adhere to strict code of honor but aren't interested in other activities like eating or swimming naked, then by all means : do it your way.
But DO IT !

BTW : Idea of Batman in Skyrim is amusing !

Who cares what acronym it fits?

All I care about is that it's fun. Which it is.

Exactly - and i'm not suggesting anything else than possible enhantion of this fun.

 

[DementedSheep]

Eh...I really have no desire to do that in Skyrim. In fallout 3 I did, I created personality and I modded the shit out of the game to be as ?realistic? as I could make it. Needing to eat, drink, sleep, avoid radioactive rain, even feed my dog and I was attempting to do allot of that before the mods came along but with elder scrolls games...not so much. I'm not sure why, maybe it?s the difference in tone.

 

[Liquid Paradox]

Why the fuck would you want to recreate the forever alone times, spent huddled in a dank room rolling dice for lack of anything better to do?

I'd much rather play Skyrim than D&D

Just a quick question, if I may: In what way, exactly, does DnD = forever alone? As in, DnD, a game which requires Multiple players to work, and therefor, is an inherently social game? Unless the Forever Alone meme now actually means "Forever Alone... except for all of the good friends I get together with at least once a week, in order to share a laugh and some good times. But other then that, yeah... alone"

OT: ... actually, I'm not really sure what the topic is.

Edit: Ah, okay, I get it now. The way the op was worded, I thought you were attacking the game, so I was confused. Now however, I see you are giving a suggestion, and a fairly good one, at that. Incidentally, I love wrpg's simply because the player character rarely has an established personality, like with Jrpg's. This gives me that chance to play my character pretty much however I want to. And frankly, I play it up, too.

Take my main character, Godrik the Clanless, for example. He's a Nord (as his name suggests) whose family moved to Bruma when he was a child. He has a lot of Nordic pride, but growing up in a city with so many non-humans has made him very open to human-elf relations, and he has no problem dealing with any of the beast races; so long as they respect him, he will respect them in turn.

Despite being faithful to the Imperials, Godrik's clan continued to worship Talos after the war, believing that the Elves would never actually enforce such a blatant disregard for Nordic tradition. However, when Thalmor agents came to Bruma and began to round up his clan, Godrik learned the truth. After watching his entire fall one by one, Godrik swore revenge, against the Thalmor, and against the Imperials, who he feels betrayed his clan. In the dead of night, Godrik fled Bruma, hoping to find solace in the land of his heritage. If you have played the beginning of the game, you know how that turned out.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Do pen and paper games provide a different experience? Without question. But that does not mean that experience is superior and when the crpg space is itself so varied it makes it impossible to make the argument that just because a computer version doesn't match some particular interpretation of the crpg experience it doesn't deserve to be called an RPG.

Nicely done sir, however i can't agree. What you said would be plausible if there would be only one and single rpg on the market - D&D (and while at that, i'm talking about latest, VERY tactical edition).

For the record, I do not make the assumption that D&D represents the width and breadth of the pen and paper space; indeed you'll find that my argument is predicated on the notion that this is not the case at all.

We have literally hundreds, thousands even (home brewed) systems with different mechanics, settings, approaches, purposes and aiming at different audiences.

This was precisely my point. You cannot point to a particular interpretation of pen and paper as being the defining standard of the genre. Games themselves differ enormously as you point out. One game may treat combat as something that ought to be tracked in incredible detail while another might handle it vaguely and abstractly while still another might have no combat at all. Some games place enormous importance upon the story and others use it as a flimsy excuse to get the players into a dungeon crawl. And different groups might play the same game differently and even the same group in the same campaign might have sessions that differ wildly in focus and mechanics from one night to the next.

There are two points that I wished to make. The first, is simply that there is no single game of any sort that defines the RPG and, as such, you cannot make an assertion that one game is not an RPG because it is not like some other game. The second is simply that the single best definition of the RPG is not found by looking at minutiae like how one game handles player stats or what how combat plays out or how the story is handled. Like the genre it represents, the RPG is defined abstractly. Simply put, what makes a game (of any sort) an RPG is agency. The more agency the player has, the more universally it would be recognized as an RPG.

Modern Warfare, for example, allows players to choose from a variety of different weapons and perks to take into battle and they are, as such, granted some agency over their character. Is that enough to call the game an RPG? I'd wager that, because the player has so little choice (you are assigned allegiance by some ineffable algorithm, told to fight on a map with no option to opt out save quitting and are given few options for victory save method of murder) most would probably say that the game is not an RPG. By contrast, Skyrim is a game that gives me an array of skills that are governed directly by mechanics. I can choose to use any of a variety of approaches to solve many problems. If all I needed was a bauble found in a chest in some dungeon, I could certainly pile on the armor and wade deep into the ranks of the enemy while swinging a sword or I could destroy them with magical fire or I could turn them into pacifists while I stroll by or I could rely on shadow and spell to sneak past. What's more, I have a fair choice in what I want to do within the confines of the game. Sure, I could join the Dark Brotherhood or I could murder them all. Sure, I'm destined to save the world but I could instead spend my time playing traveling apothecary. It is true that I don't have much agency over the narrative lines but that does not mean I am not at least allowed to steer the fate of the story as I see fit. My money says that most people would likely agree that Skyrim is an RPG. It might not be the RPG they want of course but that becomes less a matter of taxonomy and more a problem of preference.

You disregarded "dynamic story generating" and that's the one, solely point why i value RPGs that much and find it not importnat, not vital, but inseparable basis of whole RPG experience. With that in mind, i can without any doubt still hold my point : as for today cRPGs aren't able to recreate tabletop experience. Not yet.

By and large, I'd argue that this statement is one without much merit. If the aim was to replicate the pen and paper experience then sure you might be on to something. But even when games slavishly obey the very rules and setting conventions of an existing pen and paper game I hardly think the intention was to replicate the experience. Most developers are likely smart enough that what they want to do in this case is pay homage to their roots rather than slavishly replicate.

Sure, having a single player game where there is complete freedom of action and dynamic story generation that results in something fairly interesting without filling in a lot of the blanks yourself might be impossible. But how many of the games heralded as classic examples of an cRPG actually made this their aim? Because I'd be willing to bet the answer is astoundingly close to zero.

Sure it is !
However it's not that D&D defines the way RPG really is and how it should be played. Nope.
It was always more combat- than storytelling- oriented system, and this approach alone divides players into two roughly equal factions. True, there's storytelling in D&D. True, with some effort one is able to recreate let's say Lovecraftian atmosphere of unknown, alien horror while still roaming wilderness of Toril, but that doesn't change the way things are : D&D is rpg system, but it's not wholeness of RPG.

I won't argue this point because I agree entirely.

And once again, true, there are some of best cRPGs "ever", that take place in one of D&Ds settings, but have you ever wondered why ? Is it because D&D as a whole is best there is, or maybe because of its easy and flexible mechanics ? Or maybe because you can't use Planescape setting without using D&D system ? Or simply, maybe designers agreed that this kind of story/adventure/scenario/campaign that they had in mind would perfectly fit one of numerous D&D settings ?

My money says the reason is pretty simple: D&D has a brand identity. I can walk up to random people on the street and I'd wager that the majority at least know what D&D is. Could I say the same thing about World of Darkness or Gurps?

That D&D is also combat focused in terms of rules is also handy when the end design of your game involves players spending the majority of their time engaged in combat. Basically offers a cheat sheet for a huge number of the mechanical systems of your game.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

I half get what you're on about. However, I would be mighty pissed off if Bethesda forced people to adhere to that. Sure, I do play through like that, but usually on my 4th or 5th character. I admit there are certain limitations, but then, you're comparing a piece of software to human imagination. It's simply unfeasable.

 

[Chicago Ted]

snip

snip

snip

Each one of you took that throw away comment way, way, way too seriously.

I don't know what kind of nerve that triggered, but all it was meant to be was a loose nod to the stereotype. There was no need to respond with in depth reasons of why X is better than Y or whatever.

Each one of you are taking the net too seriously, now feel ashamed.

snip

And what you were talking about is nostalgia. It's not the DnD itself but the memories the game evokes.

I personally never played it. I don't think I was growing up when it was a big thing, if it ever was in the UK. So as a result I never played it. I didn't even really start playing videogames until about 4-5 years ago. MY childhood was spent making bows and arrows to fire at trees on the field behind my house.

Camping in the woods with fire and a six pack is what brings the memories of carelessness back for me.

Probably due to the fact that you're using a broad stereotype that is hardly true on a smaller group of gamers on a gaming forum where a lot of us would both want and expect to see it less. People will take it the same way as calling all those that like CoD 'brainless jocks' or something for example, but even worse based on the fact that there are less of us doing it creating a stronger reaction to backlash against it.

Honestly, your comment showed no trace of sarcasm or joking or anything in it. From the way you put it, it seemed a lot more like someone bashing it for the sake of bashing it, and from your lack of experience playing it, I still take it as that and your following comment being an attempt to cover your ass from being offensive to instead blame everyone else taking you too seriously.

You knew what you put out there, and should have realized why people would take it offensively. So just don't attempt act innocent here. You used a stereotype a lot of people hate, some took offence to that, and because of that got annoyed. Accept it and move on, but don't attempt to weakly rationalize and justify why it's everyone else's fault that they reacted that way to your comment.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Sure, having a single player game where there is complete freedom of action and dynamic story generation that results in something fairly interesting without filling in a lot of the blanks yourself might be impossible. But how many of the games heralded as classic examples of an cRPG actually made this their aim? Because I'd be willing to bet the answer is astoundingly close to zero.

At first i was like "man, that's pretty good bunch of arguments - thanks for opening my eyes", (and i still think that i gained something from this little discussion we have here), then i remembered what i actually meant back there, comparing cRPG to RPG.

I need to quote myself here, because somehow this statement drowned in the sea of "wat?"s. This thread isn't about resolving about what genre Skyrim belongs.

Of course, Skyrim BELONGS to Computer Role-Playing Game genre.

The title ? Once again :

I got your attention, right ? Good. Sorry for this little manipulation, i hope you're forgiving one.

(Pardon me, for adding "right" there. I'm always first to write but last to do a spellcheck and corrections).

Now, allow me to point out one thing... There's no freedom in video games. Period.
No matter how advanced the game is, there's not one that combines flexibility, dynamics and readiness for unpredictable behavior that are (imho) essence of tabletop RPGaming. No matter how much i'll try, i can't muster a platoon of dwarven bagpipers even if there are dwarves, bagpipes and military in given game. I can click for all eternity on some character but if it isn't prescripted then i won't be able to ask him to go on a simple FedEx quest for me. I can't create "human landmine" traps if developers didn't put that in the game first. And even despite the fact that there are armors, armorers and all needed components for making a paint - i can't have my shield painted purple and written "feces in yer faces" on it. And so on, so on, so on.

Body mutilation ? Area-of-body based system of "hit points" ? Crafting items ? Caring about one's abode ? Marriages ? Details.
Great to have them. Scrap that. It's a wonderful thing to have them ! These are the steps to perfect RPG, but we're still not there. Not yet.

Taking it all into consideration, it's possible to recreate mechanics of RPG (i guess), and in the same time - no, there's no way to recreate tabletop experience, no matter the setting or system, IF we're talking about my point of view. And since i am entitled to have one and i don't feel that it is better or worse than any other, simply different...

If the aim was to replicate the pen and paper experience then sure you might be on to something.

That makes me think. I assumed that cRPGs aim for exactly this (also money and fun, but that's another question). It never occured to me that developers (some of them with rich background in tabletop RPGs) don't gather from time to time have a beer or five and start to dream "oh, how wonderful it would be to recreate RPG on computers". I still think that it's vital argument, however i must agree, i don't have anything to back it up.

And once again, true, there are some of best cRPGs "ever", that take place in one of D&Ds settings, but have you ever wondered why ? Is it because D&D as a whole is best there is, or maybe because of its easy and flexible mechanics ? Or maybe because you can't use Planescape setting without using D&D system ? Or simply, maybe designers agreed that this kind of story/adventure/scenario/campaign that they had in mind would perfectly fit one of numerous D&D settings ?

My money says the reason is pretty simple: D&D has a brand identity. I can walk up to random people on the street and I'd wager that the majority at least know what D&D is. Could I say the same thing about World of Darkness or Gurps?

That D&D is also combat focused in terms of rules is also handy when the end design of your game involves players spending the majority of their time engaged in combat. Basically offers a cheat sheet for a huge number of the mechanical systems of your game.[/quote]

The truth is : pure single-system centered, experienced players are hard to find. I guess that at some point almost everyone tried to play D&D, however it's not exactly true that all "know it" (in terms of system, setting, lore and such) and like to play it, right ?
D&D is known, but i don't believe that for computer players (especially in cases of games like Baldur's Gate or Planescape:Torment) it was really that important. Of course that doesn't change a fact - what you said is completely logical and plausible.

Also, i'd like to remind you that for example Baldur's Gate was called AD&D 2.something (i don't remember, 2.5, 2.7 ?) since it was modified to suit digital environment. Same sotry with "The Temple of Elementa Evil" - the underlying system wasn't working the way it was supposed to despite developers hard work.
Still, even if some mechanics would be exported 1:1 from RPG to cRPG that wouldn't change a fact that even (especially ?) in the fires of battle there is a place for completely unpredictable actions. Wouldn't you ever want to simply make some pillar fall on a dragon instead of slowly turning him into a pincushion full of arrows ?

EDIT: the only reason people don't like any semblance of logic is because they know once it goes into effect, their ego deflates. Sure you can feel bad ass fighting a dragon in Skyrim, but only a true bad ass takes on a dragon in Dwarf Fortress. Why? Because DF doesn't hold your hand:

I assure you that dragons (and other giant monstrosities) are at the deep bottom of my list of things to have in crpg. I was never fond of dragonhunting and in Skyrim i accept it as a inevitable element of game but i'm not actively seeking it.
And believe me, that part of my life when my ego still grew thanks to virtual achievements is gone forever, alongside with most of my hair.