Just curious...why bother?  Serious question.

Didn't we cover that already? Well, JesterRaiin answered before me, but let me give it a try, too.

Why would I take a game constructed with OOC mechanics to give narrative control or whatever, and remove those or alter them in a way so that I'm now playing without them.  What is left that makes it worth the trouble?

How about the fact that when re-purposed some narrative systems are better at simulation than some supposedly simulationist games?

How about wanting to play in Hyboria and being unwilling to change the 2d20 system? I'd rather use 2d20 than Mongoose d20, precisely because I know the latter. Or, to use a much less controversial example, "I want to play Tianxia".

How about "my friends want to play that, and I'd like to play with them, but don't want to get in the storygaming headspace"?

Wondering what the real point of "depurposing" a game is because traditionally these types of threads are bait, waiting to drop the "see, you always play narratively anyway" or "there is no difference" or some other argument.

Let me repeat what I told you in another thread:
It's too bad you've had bad experiences with people trying to prove "it's all the same" (and yes, you have mentioned this before).
That's, however, not the argument I'm making, so I'm not going to say I'm "sorry", just in order to avoid misunderstandings!

Also, I'd ask you to kindly stop confounding me with those people! It's what people on Internet tend to call "really fucking frustrating" (I call it "time wasting").

[SPOILER]Sometimes, when discussing with you, I get the impression that I have to defend both my point of view, and the point of view of people that participated in that discussion with you - and the worst part is, I don't even think they're right! However, you have the (potentially irritating) habit of arguing against the point of those "it's all the same, peace and rainbows" people, and when you disprove it, to consider that as proof against my arguments.

At the end, I can either defend the above point, try to explain it's not the point I'm making, or ignore your comments. Neither of these is entirely satisfactory, but I usually default to option #3. This is my last attempt at #2, and I'm not going to go for #1, because that's not my position.
[/SPOILER]

If you want to make my point explicitly: if I believed story games to be exactly the same as traditional sim games, I wouldn't have started that thread. If I believed IC and OOC decisions to be the same, I wouldn't have had issues with playing D&D 4e.
The closest I'm going to get to this position is when you hear/read me saying that 1) you can re-purpose (most of) them, possibly with some effort, and sometimes it's worth it, 2) there's stuff we can learn from any kind of game - even fucking MtG, not to mention story-games, and 3) there's things all good GMs and all good players are going to do, whether it's a story game or not.
But if it's not clear, I'm talking about two different, though very closely related, kinds of games. They're close enough that the distinction doesn't matter to some people. It does matter a whole lot to others, and I've got both kinds in my group.
And I'm ready to incorporate all kinds of games in my campaigns (including wargames), if they could help me to improve the immersive experience at my table. I've done it with story games, when there were good setting reasons, I'm going to add wargames when a campaign demands it, and if I have to add chess, I'll do that, too.

Heh, ok guess I wasn't clear.  I know there's many reasons you could do such a thing, I listed a bunch myself.

I was looking more towards specifics as to why you want to do that for game X and specify the value of X.

Something like..."I really like the way 2d20 handles combat with different values like Reach and Guard while still being really fast, I just want to remove the less associated Momentum generation and spending and get rid of player Doom buys"...is system specific, interesting and addressing a particular issue.

OK, that's a different question to what I thought you were asking:).

I don't have the time to list examples now, but stay tuned. I'll offer several examples as soon as possible, which might be this evening;).

I call it "familiar" when you don't need to think about doing it:).

So on further consideration, is this not the key factor in whether someone can immersively play a particular RPG? Because if it is, then immersion is simply about what can be intuitively ignored.

Not nearly as hard as you think.

Also on further consideration I concede it's probably easier than I made it out to be, but Fate Points are still a metagame resource, and Fate Core still expects you to use them a certain way to succeed.

Out of curiosity: what's the general name for "my aspect/ability/etc is vague enough to serve me in pretty much every situation there is" exploit?

It's not an exploit, because you need Fate Points to apply it. So it doesn't matter if the fact you're 'Italian Batman' applies to everything, because it's not going to work for or against you without Fate Points.

For example, The Demolished Ones - a crossbreed between The Dark City movie and Amnesia video game.

Marvelous game. Still waiting to finish the one the designer ran for me and a brilliant editor.

If your Aspect X is wide enough to cover everything, it means you'd be doing the same thing over and over again 90% of the time. That just makes the game boring for everyone.

I'll take your challenge, and with just the Aspect 'Badass' still end up being the most interesting character in your game :p

I'm 140% convinced that all what the "New Wave" of RPG have to offer isn't that new. Merely a borrowed concepts reskinned & retouched.

Also refined, the less sexy form of technical progress.

I couldn't tell. FATE Core features one of worst, dullest corebooks I've the displeasure to read, and to this day I'm not  what it was about.

Technical writing and creative writing have priorities which are in actual opposition, yet an RPG must be written accounting for both. This is extremely difficult.

I'd suggest BULLDOGS!

So would I...

I find it a good way to learn FATE, because it uses Aspects all the time in such a way that you embrace them intuitively. Effectively, you know what they are long before you find yourself on a page where they are actually explained. It's also well written (IMHO) and features quite clever vehicle (starship) building process.

...but sadly this happened...

BULLDOGS! RPG was updated to newest version of FATE and re-released lately,

...which made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea.

FATE/*.World games require to effectively un-learn ways of traditional gaming, I think.

Moreso with Fate I think. The @World model merely draws the lines at different places. For example, in a traditional game you draw lines between using your weapon, striking a target, and doing damage. But an @World game might draw a line between being willing to use your weapon and doing damage. So fail a roll in the former, and you miss, or do no damage. But fail a roll in the latter, and you didn't have the will to strike at all.

Legend of the Wulin is actually a very good simulation of martial arts combat, including looking for opportunities and adapting depending on the enemy's approach. (Tianxia and Jadepunk do pretty much the same, but not so obviously and with less rules).

Need other examples?

Actually I'd love an example of how Tianxia and Jadepunk do what Legend of the Wulin does if it's not too much of a sidetrack.

So on further consideration, is this not the key factor in whether someone can immersively play a particular RPG? Because if it is, then immersion is simply about what can be intuitively ignored.

That's my best guess, yes.

Also on further consideration I concede it's probably easier than I made it out to be, but Fate Points are still a metagame resource, and Fate Core still expects you to use them a certain way to succeed.

And D&D expects me to go dungeoncrawling, but I used it to run city campaigns;).
Both are disappointed, but my game is fun. "Dead of the author", or, in RPG terms, "Screw whatever the rules expect me to do!"

I'll take your challenge, and with just the Aspect 'Badass' still end up being the most interesting character in your game :p

Everyone else is this, too, but they're also other things, so you'll fail:).

Moreso with Fate I think. The @World model merely draws the lines at different places. For example, in a traditional game you draw lines between using your weapon, striking a target, and doing damage. But an @World game might draw a line between being willing to use your weapon and doing damage. So fail a roll in the former, and you miss, or do no damage. But fail a roll in the latter, and you didn't have the will to strike at all.

Agreed.

Actually I'd love an example of how Tianxia and Jadepunk do what Legend of the Wulin does if it's not too much of a sidetrack.

So, I face a fast, mobile and aggressive enemy with a relatively uncomplicated style in both systems.
In LotW, I determine his style is Shadow Catching, it relies on speed, and Fears being interrupted. I'm using Flowing Universe, so I just determine I'm going to step back until I see a linear attack coming, which ought not to take long with Shadow Catching. Then I'm going forward and attack while deflecting his move, both Laughing at it because, and him being surprised giving me Fears bonus (and adding a Stealth Marvel to reduce his Tactics to justify the bonus).
The basic bonus is +10, and if I can touch him just barely without it, it's going to be a Rippling roll. Time to lay the hurt on...

In Tianxia, this is a Lightning Snake vs a Storm Tiger fight.
I have trouble doing something interesting with my first attacks, because that guy has high Athletics. So I use an action to Create Advantage: Your style is Clear to Me! Now I know I can hit him.
Next round, I Create another Advantage: Devising a Stratagem! I just determine I'm going to step back until I see one of his linear attacks coming, and then I'm going forward and attack while deflecting his move with the many, many circular blocks of Storm Tiger.
Next round, I've got 2-4 Advantages running on. Assuming I did it right, I'm now going in to hit him with my Fight with a +4 to +8 bonus before the dice. And I can use Fate points, too!
This is going to deal Consequences, it's as simple as that.

That is half of the truth I think.
It works with abstractions and moves where the problem just lies in the complexity.

Yeah, I don't mean it's the only problem. But it's a huge part of it.

But other elements demand a different stance of mind and that is something where getting out is what is necessary to operate this item, no matter how often you do it.

Indeed. This thread is meant, at least in part, to discuss different stances of mind.

I want to use a rally car racing simulator. I can adapt to complicated operation or that the simulation is not completely perfect here and there.
I can even get over the part that there is a limited set of refreshes after a crash.

But I don´t want to need to get out of the car to (re)build/ (re)code the racing track or modify my car during a race to be able to experience the race. And I also don´t want someone else to mess with it arbitrarily.

Hence the part in my OP where I say that not all story games can be used in that way;).