Game Studies: Exercise 2
Non-digital to Digitalㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ ㅤ
Table of Contents
Instructions
Lectures
Exercise 2: Non-Digital to Digital
- Choose a non-digital game which has been converted into a digital version
- Include a brief explanation of the gameplay
- Differences and similarity of play dimension (real life VS on screen)
- Tip! Pick a game with either real-time or turn-based action; describe its core game mechanics and explain how the player experiences them temporally during both play dimensions
- Benefits and disadvantages of three-dimensional
- Tip! Find a game that has appeared in both two-dimensional and three-dimensional versions; compare, and give grounds for whether three-dimensional is beneficial or not in games
- 2–8 players take turns rolling two dice
- Players move around a square board with 40 spaces
-
Landing on:
- Unowned property → Option to buy it
- Owned property → Pay rent to the owner
- Chance/Community Chest → Draw a card with random events
- Tax spaces → Pay fees to the bank
- Go to Jail → Lose turns until conditions are met
- Players can buy houses/hotels to increase rent on owned properties
- Players can trade properties with each other
- Game ends when all but one player are bankrupt
- Turn-based play
- Dice rolling
- Property purchasing
- Rent collection
- Resource management (money and assets)
- Trading and negotiation
Similarities:
- Core Mechanics: Rolling dice, buying properties, paying rent, going to jail, and drawing cards are consistent across both versions.
- Turn-Based Action: The player waits for their turn in both physical and digital formats, preserving the flow and timing of the game.
- Goal: Win by bankrupting opponents remains unchanged.
Temporal Experience:
- In real life, turns often involve lengthy decision-making and manual adjustments (e.g., counting cash, organizing cards).
- In the digital version, most is automated, so the experience feels smoother and often faster although it can reduce the sense of personal agency or negotiation in trades.
- Faster Gameplay: Minimal animations mean quicker turns and smoother transitions between actions.
- Clarity and Simplicity: The flat layout makes it easy to see the whole board, property details, and player stats at a glance.
- Lower System Requirements: Runs well on a wide range of devices including phones, tablets, and older PCs.
- Reduced Distraction: Less visual clutter allows players to focus on strategy and decisions.
- Accessibility: Easier for beginners or younger players to understand due to the straightforward presentation.
- Better for Competitive Play: Fewer delays make it more efficient for online multiplayer games and competitive sessions.
- Less Immersive: The flat design may feel dull or less engaging, especially for casual or younger players.
- Limited Visual Feedback: Property development and movement lack visual flair—houses and hotels might just be icons or flat indicators.
- Lower Aesthetic Appeal: It doesn't “bring the game to life” in the same way animated 3D versions do.
- Minimal Interactivity: Limited character animation and dynamic environments make the experience feel more mechanical.
- Less Fun for Casual Play: Some players find the lack of visual storytelling or animation less entertaining during social or family games.
- Immersive Experience: Animated tokens, buildings, and board environments make the game feel lively and engaging.
- Visual Storytelling: Properties grow into mini neighbourhoods or cities, visually reflecting progress.
- Entertainment Value: Great for casual or family play—animations add humour and charm.
- Enhanced Feedback: Dynamic visuals and sound effects provide clear cues for game events (e.g. going to jail, building houses).
- Appealing to Younger Players: Animation and movement keep younger audiences more engaged.
- Slower Pace: Animations and transitions between turns can delay gameplay.
- System Demands: Requires more powerful devices or consoles, which may not be accessible to all.
- Can Be Distracting: Visually busy interfaces may draw focus away from strategy and core gameplay.
- Cluttered Interface: On smaller screens, 3D elements can overcrowd the visual space, making it harder to read key information.
- Repetitive Animations: Over time, the same animations may feel tedious or slow down the flow unnecessarily.
2D vs 3D Monopoly
Figure 3.4 2D vs 3D Monopoly
Conclusion:
3D versions are more immersive and visually appealing,
which can be beneficial for casual players or younger
audiences. However, for competitive or fast-paced play,
2D versions are more efficient and straightforward. The
choice between them depends on whether the goal is
strategic speed or rich experience.
Reflection
Doing this exercise really opened my eyes to how a
classic game like
Monopoly
changes when it moves from the real world to a
digital screen. I’ve played both versions before,
but I never really thought about how different the
experience can be—especially in things like how
fast the game goes, how players interact, and how
much visuals can affect the feel of the game.
Looking at both the 2D and 3D versions helped me
see the pros and cons clearly. 2D is simple and
quick, which is great if you just want to focus on
the game without distractions. But the 3D version
is definitely more fun to look at—it makes the
game come to life, especially with the animations
and sound effects.
Overall, this task helped me understand that game
design isn’t just about rules and winning, but
also about how the game
feels to
play, depending on how it’s presented. It gave me
a new appreciation for how digital versions of
board games are created and why those design
choices matter.
3D versions are more immersive and visually appealing, which can be beneficial for casual players or younger audiences. However, for competitive or fast-paced play, 2D versions are more efficient and straightforward. The choice between them depends on whether the goal is strategic speed or rich experience.
Reflection
Doing this exercise really opened my eyes to how a classic game like Monopoly changes when it moves from the real world to a digital screen. I’ve played both versions before, but I never really thought about how different the experience can be—especially in things like how fast the game goes, how players interact, and how much visuals can affect the feel of the game.
Looking at both the 2D and 3D versions helped me see the pros and cons clearly. 2D is simple and quick, which is great if you just want to focus on the game without distractions. But the 3D version is definitely more fun to look at—it makes the game come to life, especially with the animations and sound effects.
Overall, this task helped me understand that game design isn’t just about rules and winning, but also about how the game feels to play, depending on how it’s presented. It gave me a new appreciation for how digital versions of board games are created and why those design choices matter.