What's Wrong with Virtual Tabletop Play?

[Hussar]

I've seen the following opinion, or something pretty close to it, expressed a number of times:

*snip*

If the WDI is some sort of virtual tabletop that would replace my looking someone in the eye and speaking the description to them, then I've got no interest in it. PBEM/PBP is nice, and can be fun, but isn't as good as real gaming. I guess I wouldn't sneer at a really shiney tool for that, but it doesn't merit much hype. Play by chat or the like would drive me insane. If I'm going to game real-time, it needs to be face-to-face. I'll burn my books before I play on a chat-like system.

I really don't understand this point of view. I'm not saying it's wrong, because, well, it's not. But, I don't understand. What about playing in a chat based game, like Fantasy grounds or OpenRPG, is so distasteful? Why is there this view that face to face is so superior for playing RPG's?

I've been playing over OpenRPG for almost four years now. I started because there was no other option - no gamers in my area. However, over the years, I've discovered that there are quite a number of advantages playing over a computer than face to face, to the point where, while I wouldn't say no to a F2F game, I honestly think I would see both venues as equal.

Why the distaste for chat based games.

((Note, I'm not talking about PbP. That's a whole 'nother beastie with an entirely different feel from real time gaming. I see PbP as more collaborative fiction writing than RPG gaming.))

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I like to sit in the same room with my buddies and game, drink a few beers, and have fun. Online isn't bad, but I don't find it as fun as sitting at the same table.

 

[EricNoah]

If I had to choose between "virtual D&D" and "no D&D" I would choose "no D&D." Particularly as DM. I wouldn't want to run such a game -- it just sounds like no fun at all. I don't think I'd want to be a player either. The pace, the interactions, the fluidity of communication all suffer online.

 

[Raloc]

I've seen the following opinion, or something pretty close to it, expressed a number of times:



I really don't understand this point of view. I'm not saying it's wrong, because, well, it's not. But, I don't understand. What about playing in a chat based game, like Fantasy grounds or OpenRPG, is so distasteful? Why is there this view that face to face is so superior for playing RPG's?

I've been playing over OpenRPG for almost four years now. I started because there was no other option - no gamers in my area. However, over the years, I've discovered that there are quite a number of advantages playing over a computer than face to face, to the point where, while I wouldn't say no to a F2F game, I honestly think I would see both venues as equal.

Why the distaste for chat based games.

((Note, I'm not talking about PbP. That's a whole 'nother beastie with an entirely different feel from real time gaming. I see PbP as more collaborative fiction writing than RPG gaming.))

I've been playing with the same group in a custom VTabletop, then WebRPG and then ORPG for a total of about 8 years. The group is spread all over Europe and North America, so it's basically the only way we could play for a long time. We've played face to face before (during two weeks, we met in Geneva for marathon games!) and we find that more people get in character with dialog and decision making, there is less goofing off, and things generally go smoother. Granted, this doesn't happen until you get your groove going, and there can be problems, but it is still quite fun. Nothing to sneer at by any measure.

I've run some games with partially having members also in a Teamspeak, Ventrilo or Skype style VOIP app while playing in ORPG, and it helps combat go a lot faster. As well as getting everyone on the same page as far as actions and the like. All IC stuff goes into ORPG, OOC in Teamspeak or Vent.

All that said, there are some things I really dislike about VT. Not being able to merely print maps is annoying, and fumbles with switching NPC names can be annoying and immersion breaking. All in all though, it works really good.

 

[Aaron L]

If I had to choose between "virtual D&D" and "no D&D" I would choose "no D&D." Particularly as DM. I wouldn't want to run such a game -- it just sounds like no fun at all. I don't think I'd want to be a player either. The pace, the interactions, the fluidity of communication all suffer online.

No need for me to type it over, he said it.

 

[Hussar]

The pace, the interactions, the fluidity of communication all suffer online.

I'm curious why you think that. It's pretty much the opposite of my experience. I find that most people are much better at staying in character and are much more focused on the game during online sessions. It's easier to believe that 300 pound fat guy with a beard is really a hot elf when you cannot actually see him.

Now, I will agree that combat can be glacially slow. To be fair, it took a bit of time to work with my players in getting that up to speed. However, now, I look at the problems that others have like keeping track of buffs, and it's a complete breeze doing it online. Add a "?" to your die roller and away you go. My 14th level party of six players blasts through rounds in about 5-10 minutes on average.

 

[Dracorat]

I run a game biweekly using Maptool. My players love it.

www.rptools.net

 

[crazy_cat]

I like to sit in the same room with my buddies and game, drink a few beers, and have fun.

Agreed.

Online isn't bad, but I don't find it as fun as sitting at the same table.

Agreed again, although I've never played a virtual tabletop game - I've had no need. I'll add an additional qualifier to the second statement as well, and this may just be personal preference - if I'm going to play an online RP game via my PC I'd like it to take advantage of all the things my PC can do such as sound and graphics (and complex maths ) - so I'd play Neverwintwer Nights or a similar game by choice.

Indeed once NWN2 has been patched to the point where I consider it a playable DM'able online RPG I'll start up the regular online games again with the group I used to play with. Until then however I'll make do with just my regular face to face game.

IMNSHO, Online gaming can enevr replace face to face gaming for those who can get it, but it can be a nice extra - and obviously for those who can't find a face to face group it may be the only option.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I'm another one in the "around the table or not at all" camp.

 

[DragonLancer]

It's the time. Playing face to face at a table, you have a game that lasts for say 4 hours. On a virtual environment, it takes twice the time to type it than to say it, so you only get have the gaming in.

That to me is one issue. The other is that theres nothing like sitting at a table with your mates face to face, as oppposed to sitting on your larry typing it into a computer.