I had some insight today into why I don't typically like computer games, but do like boardgames. I figured that part of it was people interaction, but I still don't really want to play games such as Katamari Damacy, even though they inspire a lot of commentary and cooperation between the person currently playing and everyone else.
It comes down to iterated effort versus analysis. By iterated effort I mean attempting an identical task repeatedly in an effort to succeed, whether that means simple success or maximizing your outcome. This is typical of many computer games, where there are save checkpoints and you can make as many attempts as you want to achieve success. Analysis, on the other hand, I use here to describe tasks where there's a lot of thinking about the general traits and specific challenges of the task during times when you are not attempting to complete the task. This suits many boardgames well because you are unlikely to be able to conveniently set up repeated attempts at completion of the same task, and each play may be very different due to the input provided by other players, but general approaches are amenable to analysis.
Naturally, there's overlap. I tend not to like mission-oriented first-person shooters, but I do enjoy a certain amount of head-to-head play. Here there is not a set task to repeat, but rather the changing challenge of other players. If I actually played this kind of game more than once a year, it might fall into set parameters and become more iterative in nature.
This applies outside of games, of course. In martial arts, I dislike long forms (requires iterative effort to perfect) but really enjoy working with people (inherently less iterative, more amenable to analysis).