From the moment games could be computerized, developers have attempted to adapt popular board games for each console and platform. Just look at some of your favorite electronic game venues, like Xbox Live, iTunes, and (of course) Facebook, and see how many board game adaptations you can count. Sometimes these adaptations are successful, capturing the feel and excitement of the traditional form. Other times the adaptation is a wash, with families and players preferring to break out the old-fashioned board instead of powering on a console. So what's the secret to board game adaptation success?

Obviously the first element to consider is the popularity of the original game. People aren't likely to grab an adaptation of a game they didn't care all that much for in the first place. You see lots of attempts to recapture the excitement of Monopoly, but none for rival title Anti-Monopoly. Why? Because the latter just isn't as popular as the former. So obviously it's going to be the popular, time-honored titles that are targeted for adaptation, as opposed to the flash-in-the-pan games developed as tie-in products for whatever hot new craze is popular.

Of course, there's no doubting the convenience factor of playing classic games digitally. With a digital venue, you don't have to worry about lengthy set-ups or finding all of the pieces when the game is over. This is especially important with big games like Risk, where games can go on for hours upon hours. Not only does removing the elaborate setup of the game save time, but the game can be saved if it goes on for too long or something interrupts game play. You don't have to worry about pets knocking over pieces, people disturbing the game board, or another intrusion. Risk is one of those games that practically demands the digital format, and once you've played it that way, it's hard to go back to the traditional game.

On the other hand, the game's intention also has to be considered, and there are just some intentions that don't translate well to a digital world. Monopoly would be a key example of this. Sure, a digital version makes it easier to set up the game and to put it away when interruptions come, but by playing the digital version you miss out on the entire intent of the game: greed. There's just something about having piles of play money and deeds lined up in front of you that a digital counter can't capture. Being able to quickly look around the board and see who's winning has yet to be replaced in the digital world.

And yet, the ultimate thing video game adaptations have to offer is the ability to play with other players. Let's be honest: those board games you covet just sit there on the shelf collecting dust a lot of the time. Occasionally the opportunity comes to pull one out and play with friends and family, but then what? One game gets attention and love while the other sit there on the shelf continuing to collect dust as well as collecting resentment against the game that got played. Yet again, multiplayer games offer a solution for the casual gamer - arrange a mutual time your friends can gather online, or try your luck against total strangers, and suddenly you've got a game going with no real setup required.

Of course, if all you want is practice playing the game, so you can better trounce your friends and family the next time you gather for a real game, digital versions offer that ability as well. Almost all digital renditions of board games give the opportunity to play against the computer. It may not be as challenging as a human opponent (just ask chess masters), but getting some practice building better words in Scrabble, for example, is always a good thing, if only so you don't have to play "KWIJIBO" the next time you face your father.

Video games will never completely replace board games. There's something about the live camaraderie of gathering around a table, rolling dice, and joking with friends, that a computerized version can't replicate. What they do offer, however, is a nice alternative for players who may not have a ton of time to set up, play, and tear down a complex game. That, and it's much easier to put the game aside if needed.