Gametable environments
Gameskraft
• 2025
Creative Direction
+ 3D & VFX
The Question
How do you prove that a beautiful visual is strategic before anyone lets you build it?
Brief
"Make it look pretty" is a brief creative teams get far too often without many specifics. When this happens, asking for specifics offers only ambiguous solutions.
When we were asked to "make the game tables look better", we saw a much bigger opportunity: players were spending hours per week in these environments, and we had a chance to create something that communicated aspiration and quality rather than treating the space as an afterthought. So what does "aspiration" and "premium quality" look like?
So really, "make it look pretty" is an exercise in building a consistent vocabulary. And so I saw an opportunity to improve the experience for players (my most important goal), to establish the strategic value I could bring to the table (which helps everybody involved), and to prove that we were capable of doing it.
Approach
Proving creative concepts means showing rather than explaining. We can talk about quality all day, but until someone(the end-user, in this case) can see the difference, we're just talking.
When I started building the case for these environments, we pulled competitive analysis from the highest-grossing card games on the market and placed our existing RummyTime table next to those references. The gap showed up immediately: flat lighting that killed depth, materials that looked like placeholders, and zero atmospheric detail that could hold a player's attention. But I found more value in asking what "better" actually meant for our player base rather than just listing problems.
I used RummyTime as my first litmus test to build a shared vocabulary before proving that it works. I proposed doing simple hygiene fixes by using better lighting, readable and appealing materials, and subtle atmospheric cues that immersed players in the space. We could ship it, measure what happened, and use real data to decide whether to continue.
The updated RummyTime table went live and session length increased measurably. Those few extra minutes per session compounded across the player base into material business impact. The results unlocked funding for the full program across all brands, proved that environment design could function as retention strategy, and gave the team confidence that we knew how to deliver on the promise.
Making
Building a pipeline that scales means making early decisions that hold up when the pressure increases and timelines compress.
When we started production on RummyTime, I established a full 3D pipeline using Blender for modeling and layout, Substance for materials, and After Effects for final compositing. I documented every step of the process so that when we needed to scale to multiple brands, the team could focus on creative problems instead of reinventing technical workflows. The pipeline worked the same way for every brand we touched.
The file structure enforced clear stages of work, which meant anyone could jump into a project and understand where to find working files, where to place final renders, and where exports lived:
Our primary constraint came from the product side. We couldn't touch the UI layout, which meant the table, UI elements, and player positions were all fixed in place. We had to express atmosphere in whatever space remained around those constraints. This forced us to ask: what does atmosphere actually require? What's the minimum set of elements that communicate a complete environment to a player?
I started every brand at 100% detail density and then carved away until every remaining element carried maximum atmospheric weight. If a prop didn't communicate the theme immediately when a player looked at the table, I cut it. This constraint became productive because it forced us to make every element count rather than relying on visual density to create mood.
For RummyTime, we needed to create the feeling of a suave nightclub where elite players gathered. I used deep purples, velvet upholstery, and neon edge lighting to build a space that read as exclusive without pushing players away. The edge-lit neon created spatial depth in an otherwise dark environment, which solved the problem of making a top-down view feel like an actual room rather than a flat graphic.
RummyCulture needed to feel like an ornate game room built for champions. I used baroque moldings, warm wood finishes, and directional lighting that emphasized the richness of every material in the scene. The palette centered on warm golds and rich browns to communicate weight and legacy rather than surface flash.
RummyPrime needed to feel like a smoky cabaret jazz club, the kind of space that comes alive after midnight. I used art deco props, dark olive marble with black veining, and gold inlays positioned where light would catch them naturally. The lighting stayed moody with long shadows and selective highlights that drew attention to specific details without flooding the scene.
For Pocket52, we developed six thematic variants to test what players actually responded to when given choices. The default background used dark leather and brass accents to create a serious poker room where meaningful games happened. Beach shack used sunlit wood and casual props to suggest playing cards on vacation. Texas saloon used weathered planks and western details to evoke frontier gambling halls. Godfather used black leather and mafia-den luxury as a direct cinematic reference that players recognized immediately. Minimal stripped everything back to enable focus for players who wanted zero distraction. Rooftop suggested a penthouse or private manor through materiality and carefully chosen props that implied wealth without stating it directly. We also developed a cricket-themed variant tied to Rajasthan Royals for players who wanted that specific association.
On Pocket52, the team had absorbed the methodology well enough that I could delegate execution while providing direction and guidance rather than being hands-on at every stage. This allowed us to produce six environments in the time it had taken to produce one initially, while maintaining the quality bar and thematic coherence we'd established. The team was learning to think through atmospheric problems independently and ask the right questions about what each environment needed to achieve.
Throughout the work, we kept refining our understanding of what actually creates atmosphere in a constrained space. A single banker's lamp positioned correctly does more work than three generic decorations scattered around. A patterned rug grounds the composition and provides visual rhythm that helps players orient themselves in the space. Every prop had to justify its presence by doing specific work, or I removed it from the scene.
The material work in Substance gave us control over surface variation and wear patterns that made environments feel lived-in rather than like unused showrooms. Velvet isn't just a color choice, it's how light breaks across the textile structure and creates depth through micro-shadows. Wood grain needed directionality that felt natural rather than repeating in ways that revealed the texture as a digital tile. Marble needed veining that read as something geological that formed over time rather than something a computer generated in seconds.
The camera angle was locked at top-down across all backgrounds, which meant we couldn't use traditional cinematic techniques for creating spatial depth through perspective shifts or camera movement. Instead, I used perspective cues like receding floor patterns and layered furniture to suggest rooms that extended beyond what the frame could show. The lighting became our primary tool for creating atmosphere within this constraint, and learning to work within that limitation made the team sharper about what actually matters when you're designing environments that players will see from a fixed angle for hours at a time.
Impact
Environment design either functions as strategy or it doesn't. The test is whether it changes player behavior in ways that matter to the business and the product experience.
When the updated environments went live, players spent measurably more time per session. The increase compounded across millions of sessions into material revenue impact that justified the investment and unlocked future work. More importantly, the work proved that backgrounds weren't decoration that could be deprioritized. They were a retention tool that affected how players experienced the product and whether they wanted to return for another session.
For Pocket52, the thematic variants revealed player preferences through adoption data. Godfather dominated, which told us players responded strongly to aspiration and cinematic references they could recognize. The minimal theme performed respectably, indicating a meaningful segment of users valued focus over atmospheric detail when they needed to concentrate. Beach and rooftop underperformed significantly, likely because they read as vacation settings rather than competitive spaces where something meaningful was at stake for the player.
The work established more than just better-looking tables. It built a repeatable pipeline that became the foundation for all subsequent environment projects across the company. It gave the team a methodology for thinking about atmosphere as a strategic design element rather than an afterthought that got handled at the end of production. Over two years of pushing in different directions across four brands and multiple thematic variants, we developed a shared vocabulary for discussing quality and a proven process for achieving it under tight constraints.
The broader takeaway is that environmental cues matter even when players can't articulate why one space feels premium and another drives them away. Lighting quality, material believability, and prop placement are not details that can be deferred or compromised when budgets get tight. They are the difference between a product that feels worth engaging with and one that players abandon after a few sessions. Players respond to craft whether or not they have the language to explain what they're responding to, and that response shows up in retention metrics that directly affect the business.
Credits
Direction - Niranjan Raghu
Lead 3D Artist - Neeraj Parab
3D Artists - Ronil Dash, Pratik Mukhopadhyay
Graphic Designers - Diwakar Pradhan, Soumik Lahiri, Joy Gupta, Jithin Prasad, Anna Sojan, Zurrek Abedin, Arnav Mazumdar







