Physical vs Digital Tabletop Games
Andreas Larsson
Jonas Ekblad
Main field: Computer Science Program: Game Development Bachelor thesis
15 credits Spring 2020
Supervisor: José Maria Font Fernandez Examiner: Alberto Enrique Alvarez Uribe Final seminar: 1 June 2020
Physical vs Digital Tabletop Games
Abstract
This paper shows the difference in User Experience between Physical and Digital tabletop games. The goal of the project is to get an understanding of how and why playing tabletop games differentiates depending on the platform. Seven tabletop games have been chosen from different genres with an official digital adaptation. We’ve measured four key factors, Usability, Aesthetics, Social Connectivity and Engagement. The key factors have been used to gather User Experience metrics that were used to compare the digital and physical versions of the tabletop games.
The result from this thesis is that physical tabletop games have a higher rating than the digital versions in all key factors except in usability where the differences were miniscule.
Games that rely on imperfect information offer a much higher social connectivity and engagement when it’s played around a table. Games relying on tile-placement offers a higher usability and engagement when played digitally due to the assistance provided by the game.
Physical tabletop games are the preferred option of the two but the accessibility of the digital versions makes them remain relevant.
1. Introduction
Tabletop games have been around for thousands of years [1] and are now at their peak [2]. Games like Talisman, Magic: The Gathering and other popular titles are showing up on the digital platform. The digital versions make games more accessible than their physical versions. The online mode also gives the user a quick access to play with friends or strangers. Thanks to the digital adaptations, you can bring hundreds of tabletop games on your laptop instead of carrying around the physical games that stack up and take up space.
Playing tabletop games on the computer might change User Experience. Chief Marketing Officer of Asmodee Digital, Phillipe Dao claims “You can't really recreate the exact transposition of a physical board game to a digital platform; it's not possible,”. He further claims ”You can't replace the fact that you're playing with friends or family around the table and all the social interactions that you can have... So from this point of view you never have cannibalisation because it's a different experience” [3].
Researching this would let future developers or researchers make a better estimate of success concerning transitioning their tabletop game to digital. As well as what to expect concerning what users want in digital versions.
determine how they differ in terms of gameplay mechanics. The selection was made to cover the majority of existing genres. Following that a testphase where playtesters play both the physical and digital versions of the games while being monitored for reactions, conversations and mood. After finishing a set amount of sessions the participants are given a questionnaire. These will be the go to source of information to measure the user experiences.
1.1 Research Questions
RQ1: What do players prefer in physical over digital tabletop games, or the opposite?
RQ2: What aspects of the game disappear in its digital implementation and is this a good thing? RQ3: How does impressions of the game mechanics vary between the digital and physical version?
2. Related Research
2.1 Game Analysis
Clara Fernández-Vara describes how a game analysis should start with the participants playing the game extensively and critically. Playing critically requires making a series of choices about how to play since our choices may yield different information, we have to be methodical and aware of what we do while we play. This is followed by analysing the game context and mechanics. Clara Fernández-Vara suggests using these questions for describing the gameplay mechanics [4].
● What does the player do in the game?
● What are the verbs that describe the basic actions? ● What are the core mechanics of the game?
● How are they meaningful? ● Which actions are less frequent?
● How does the player perform the actions in the game?
Fernández further explains about elements such as surprising aspects of the interactions, assumptions made by the game, frustrations, recurring patterns and relationships with the context.
2.2 Measuring the User Experience
In 2008, a book named Measuring the User Experience by William Albert and Arthur Thulis took up methods of how to measure UX (User Experience) data[5]. They believe that the UX revolves around 3 characteristics.
● A user is involved
● That user is interacting with a product, system, or really anything with an interface ● The users’ experience is of interest, and observable or measurable
UX’s is increasingly getting a more important role as the product's complexity is getting more complex. With the use of UX in the development of complex products, there’s a possibility for them to still remain efficient, user friendly and engaging. Some of the metrics they take up as important are: task success,
user satisfaction, and errors. There are several questions that are needed to be answered between the physical and digital board games:
● Will the product be recommended by the users?
● Is the digital product more efficient than its physical counterpart? ● Are the core mechanics improved in the digital adaptation? ● How does the UX of this product compare with the other version?
The benefit of using UX metrics is measuring the magnitude of an issue instead of being an assumption. In this study the focus is comparing the UX between tabletop games with their digital counterpart. The ideal way of doing this, according to William Albert and Thomas Tullis, is by using the following steps; Task Success, Efficiency, Self-reported Metrics and Combined & Comparative Metrics.
Task success measures that the user is able to perform certain tasks without help.
Efficiency revolves around the time required to complete a task. An example of such a task would be placing tokens or setting up a session. The impact of efficiency may give interesting results as in the digital versions, most menial tasks such as shuffling a deck, dealing out cards and keeping the score are automatically managed, saving the user time. On the other hand, the time it takes to manage these tasks could potentially add to the social aspect as it gives them an opportunity to converse [6].
Self-Reported Metrics are metrics we gather by asking the participants about their experience. This will be managed by constructing questionnaires using a method known as GUESS[11]. These questionnaires will be using a Likert scale that is a statement which the users rate their level of agreement. The statements are from a positive standpoint and are scaled from 1-7 where high values are positive responses.
Last step, Combined & Comparative metrics about what to do once all data has been gathered. As the name suggests, the data will be combined and then compared to one another. The comparisons will mostly be focused on physical and digital versions of each game but it can also be used to compare all physical and digital games as a whole.
2.3 Rise of board games
The popularity and production of board games has had a steady increase ever since the 1950s with a couple of spikes here and there. One of the earlier spikes occurred around 1979 when the award Spiel de Jahres (“Game of the Year”) was introduced, awarding the best Card and Tabletop game of the year [7].
It was during the introduction of the class Eurogame, also known as German-style board game, that the production of games made the most significant spike. These are games that generally require the player to put in more thought and planning into their decision than party games. The most noticeable Eurogame was Settlers of Catan that was introduced 1995.
After this the interest of tabletop games has increased and become more accessible due to the availability of various media. The Internet and Social Media gave players possibilities to connect and build communities. The online forum and game database Boardgamegeek rank went from 6000th to 2700th on the Most Popular Website between the years 2012-2020 [8].
Youtube and other streaming media offered ways to observe gameplay and reviews that has contributed to the increased interest in tabletop games. There are more reasons behind how and why tabletop games have grown in production and popularity but these are what’s considered the most important.
Milestones: ● Spiel de Jahres ● Settlers of Catan ● Pandemic ● Kickstarter ● TabletTop Show
Figure 2.3.1 Represents the number of board games published every year up to 2015 [9].
“According to ICv2, a trade publication that covers board games, comic books, and other hobbyist products, sales of hobby board games in the U.S. and Canada increased from an estimated $75 million to $305 million between 2013 and 2016, the latest year for which data is available” [10].
3. Description of Method
In this study we are going to figure out how the player experience may vary depending on what platform they’re playing on. As a player may enjoy rolling the dice, they may not enjoy the micro management of the pieces.
We’ve avoided tools/games that aren't considered an official digital adaptation of the games.
The importance of leading playtests in a correct manner will be crucial. Playtests run without preparation could lead to a faulty result. Also the importance of knowing what to look for and the most optimal way of gathering information and reaching a correct conclusion. Studies upon user experience metrics, game design, etc is what will give the result a higher depth. This step is relevant throughout this study, from start to finish.
After finishing the research, we will go through all the relevant findings that will become the center of the discussion.
3.1 Selection criteria when picking games for the study
● Has a digital implementation
○ This study focuses on comparison between physical and digital tabletop games, it’s essential that there’s a digital implementation that represents the physical.
● Physical version released before its counterpart ● Represent a genre
○ The focus is to run a research on the difference between physical and digital tabletop games as a whole. This means that focusing on one specific genre would threaten the validity of this study.
○ Two games can’t be too similar in gameplay as the study tries to be as broad and informative as possible.
● Availability
○ Games that are offered for free gain an upper hand in the selection over many of their competitors. The games Carcassonne and Ticket to Ride were offered for free on the EPIC Games which impacted the selection in their favor.
● Fits within budget ○ Money
■ There are highly regarded games that would cost too much to run valid playtests on. One genre that usually falls into this category is Trading Card Games such as Magic: The Gathering. They offer thousands of cards that would expand far beyond the set budget.
○ Time
■ Gathering playtesters with the time to play up to seven games on two different platforms is a challenge of its own. Games that take too long is something that needs to be avoided. An example of such a game is RISK that has an estimated playing time of 1-8 hours [13].
● Good reviews
○ Both versions of each game should have reviews available that gives insight on the type of game it is and how it’s played. This benefits the study as positive reviews lets us know that these games have a high probability of being fun and informative.
● Core mechanics intact
○ The implementation of the digital game should remain true to its physical predecessor. Meaning that the core mechanics should remain true and not be a spinoff of the original. This study focuses on the UX from games played on different platforms and how this change affects the UX.
● Limit the amount of games
○ Time is an important resource we have during this study. This means that picking too many games could threaten the completion of the study before designated time. This topic was discussed with our supervisor and we reached the conclusion that seven was a good number that would cover the majority of genres.
3.2 Games chosen for this study
Following seven games were chosen for this study based on Section 3.3 criterias: 1. Carcassonne - Tile Based - Eurogame
2. Love Letter - Card Game, Strategy, Deduction, Renaissance 3. Mysterium - Cooperative, Mystery
4. Small World - Strategy
5. Ticket to Ride - Family, Railway
6. Twilight Struggle - Strategy, Wargames 7. UNO - Family, Card Game
3.3 Game Design Analysis
Before any playtesting is done there will be a need to analyze the chosen tabletop games from the perspective of game design. This entails both the physical and digital versions as there’s a need to compare both versions of each game in this study.
Clara Fernandez Vara has developed five steps in for making a game design analysis [4]. The steps five steps are :
1. Before you start writing: Play the game
This step is to get a personal understanding of the games and their mechanics. ● Play the game extensively
○ Familiarize yourself with the game and its components. ● Takes notes while you play
○ Purpose of this is to keep track of what is happening during the sessions. Both good and bad things.
● Use walkthroughs wisely
○ In this particular case this means rule sheet etc. ● Read what other people have written about the game
○ To gain an understanding of what other people think about the game and learn more about the games.
2. Type of analysis
These game design analysis are considered comparative analysis. The analysis is based on how the games are played and the difference between the implementations are. Comparative analysis is usually a double analysis where two different games are analyzed and compared. In this case the games compared are the same but on different platforms.
3. Contextualize
In this step the analysis is given context. Information of the developers, genre, year it was made and technological context. Technological context focuses on what platform the game was originally made for. As all the games involved in this study are originally physical tabletop games and the digital copies are made PC
4. Game Overview
This part involves number players, description of gameplay, rules and goals. This step gives an overview to the reader that is unfamiliar with the games that are in this study.
5. Formal elements
As they are played using the same rules and mechanics the analysis of formal elements of the game will be the same.
3.4 Test phase
This is a subject that heavily relies on user experience we’re going to use playtesters as our main source of information. The playtesters are going to play both physical and digital versions of the games. During the sessions the playtesters will be observed for reactions, conversations and mood. Fernández talks about elements to look out for are surprising aspects of the interactions, assumptions made by the game, frustrations, recurring patterns and relationships with the context [4].
Each board game in this study takes a different amount of times to complete. The digital versions have a tendency to take a shorter amount of time compared to their physical counterparts. The tests for the physical and digital are run in different manners as the physical games are tested on local and the digital are played online.
Each game had a set amount of sessions in order for the playtesters a chance to get an understanding of the rules and give a fair evaluation. The downside of this was the time required to run the playtests but in return the results are more reliable.
The playtests for the digital versions were made online due to the accessibility and the legitimacy towards games that depend on imperfect information. The downside of doing this is that we were not able observe their reactions during the playtests. On the other hand it allowed us to run more tests due not having to split the time between physical and digital games during our local playtests.
The playtesters were first introduced to the Digital versions as it allowed them to learn the rules quickly and as there’s no need to manage artifacts.
3.5 Participants
In total 30 individuals were asked to take part in this study. Due to difficulties with time schedule and Covid-19 several of the individuals couldn’t participate in any playtests. This also led to several
individuals only managing to attend a few local play sessions and in several cases only taking part in the online tests. 19 individuals were able to attend in total spread across all games and platforms. There were five females and fourteen males. Everyone except two were within the age gap of 23-37 and the remaining two were 58 and 60 years old. 16 of the playtesters were experienced gamers, meaning they play at least 10 hours/week and three where playing games is only on rare occasions. Details regarding how many participants took part can be found in the result section.
3.6 Experiment Setup
Several of the games offered tutorials but the playtesters were not allowed to go through them as navigating the game was something that was measured. However the playtesters were allowed to discuss this between one another. They were given a premise of the goals and rules of the game and during times that required clarification on the rules help was offered.
Mysterium was a special case in that it’s an asymmetrical game that requires one of the playtesters to play as a ghost while the others play as mediums. Due to the nature of asymmetrical games there was
no other choice than to let one of the playtesters start out playing as the Ghost. After each session the positions were rotated and the player that played as Ghost went on to play as Medium while another became the Ghost.
For communication we used the third party application Discord[23] to keep the social interaction between the players.
3.6.1 Scope of testing
Table A1: Scopes of playtesting
Game Digital Time Physical Time Description
Carcassonne ~15-30*3 min ~30-90*3 min The sessions are played from start to finish.
Each playtester got the chance to play each version three times.
The participants were offered instructions regarding the goal of the game.
Love Letter ~15*3 min ~20*3 min The sessions are played from start to finish.
Each playtester got the chance to play each version three times.
The participants were offered instructions regarding the goal of the game.
Mysterium ~30*x min ~42*x min The sessions are played from start to finish.
The amount of sessions depends on the amount of playtesters that took part in the
session to offer everyone a chance to play ghost. X on time represents the number of
players in the playtest.
The participants were offered instructions regarding the goal of the game.
Small World ~30-50*3 ~40-80*3 min The sessions are played from start to finish.
Each playtester got the chance to play each version three times.
The participants were offered instructions regarding the goal of the game.
Ticket to Ride ~25-35*3 min ~30-60*3 min The sessions are played from start to finish.
Each playtester got the chance to play each version three times.
The participants were offered instructions regarding the goal of the game.
Twilight Struggle ~45-60*3 min ~120-180 min*3 The sessions are played from start to finish.
Each playtester got the chance to play each version three times.
regarding the goal of the game.
UNO ~10 min*3 ~30 min*3 The sessions are played from start to finish.
Each playtester got the chance to play each version three times.
The participants were offered instructions regarding the goal of the game.
3.7 GUESS
During the playtests where going to ask questions revolving around observations. Questions could revolve around why a player makes a certain move or behaves in a way. Reasons behind this is to get a more in depth understanding of it. This could potentially confirm suspicions or add a point to reasons that otherwise might’ve been overlooked.
Questionnaires were provided to our playtesters after a complete set of sessions for both versions of the game. The result provided from these will offer an overall sentiment of their user experience.
The questionnaires structure was inspired by a method known as Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS)[11] that uses a scale from 1-7. GUESS focuses on nine factors:
● Usability
○ The ease in which the game can be played with clear goals/objectives in mind and with minimal cognitive interferences or obstructions from the user interfaces and controls ● Narratives
○ The story aspects of the game (e.g., events and characters) and their abilities to capture the player’s interest and shape the player’s emotions
● Play Engrossment
○ The degree to which the game can hold the player’s attention and interest ● Enjoyment
○ The amount of pleasure and delight that was perceived by the player as a result of playing the game
● Creative Freedom
○ The extent to which the game is able to foster the player’s creativity and curiosity and allows the player to freely express his or her individuality while playing the game ● Audio Aesthetics
○ The different auditory aspects of the game (e.g., sound effects) and how much they enrich the gaming experience
● Personal Gratification
○ The motivational aspects of the game (e.g., challenge) that promote the player’s sense of accomplishment and the desire to succeed and continue playing the game
● Social Connectivity
○ The degree to which the game facilitates social connection between players through its tools and features
○ The graphics of the game and how attractive they appeared to the player
3.8 Customizing GUESS
The downside of GUESS is that it only offers a rating around the nine factor and doesn’t focus on core mechanics. Another downside is it’s focus on Video Games and not physical tabletop games. To solve this issue we had to modify the GUESS method. Remove irrelevant items and factors regarding topics that appear in neither version. There was also a need to add questions that focus on core mechanics of the games and the genre itself.
The result of this has led to having to narrow down the categories and categorize the questions into their related fields. The new categories are:
● Usability represents task success and efficiency. This involves understanding rules and game mechanics. Also being able to navigate the game board, setting up a game, etc.
● Engagement represents how engrossed the player is in the session. If they are in suspense on pending results, worried about getting found out and how engrossed they are in the game in general.
● Social Connection represents the social aspects of the game. Be it conversation between players, playing politics, etc.
● Aesthetics represent the visual and eventual audio aspects of the game. How art matches with the theme of the game, pretty to look at, etc.
● Enjoyment represents the amount of perceived pleasure and delight resulted from the player playing the game.
The reasoning behind these changes is to adapt the questions to the games and their platforms. Visual and Audio Aesthetics has been combined as the physical versions do not have any audio.
Personal Gratification and Play Engrossment has been combined into Engagement. There are studies showing that engrossment or rather paying attention and keeping track of time is a result based on how engaged a player is in the activity [ 24]. This resulted in the decision to make this into a combined category.
The factor Narratives focuses on characters development, progression through story, and how they identified themselves with the characters. Creative Freedom (CF) measures the extent the game triggers the player’s creativity, curiosity and to freely express their individuality.
These factors were both excluded due to the similarities it carries in both versions of the game and doesn’t add any insight into the player experiences between Physical and Digital tabletop games. The games are compared using the same mechanics, rules and with the only difference being the way it’s played. In one of the aspects where CF might’ve differentiated is when cheating would’ve been involved [25]. Depending on what platforms the game is being played, there are different ways a player can cheat. The playtesters are however refrained from doing this.
3.9 Measure Results
When all the playtests have been gathered, they will undergo a review. The response from each question will be added into a total score, divided by the amount of responses to get an average and
lastly divided by the highest score which is 7. Lastly this average score will be divided by 7 and multiplied by 100. This gives us a score that scales from 1-100 to gain a more precise value.
3.9.1 Scope of results
1 Strongly Disagree 25 Disagree 50 Undecided 75 Agree 100 Strongly Agree4. Contributions
The goal with this study is to contribute knowledge on how intended game mechanics and impressions may change depending on what platform they’re being played. This is relevant for future developers or researchers to make a better estimate of success concerning transitioning their tabletop game to digital. The common trend between digital games compared to their physical counterparts is efficiency. There’s no need for shuffling and dealing the cards, the game keeps track of what cards have been played and how many of them there are left. This makes the game time of each session faster and allows the players to play more games than they’d be able to in the physical version.
All the game mechanics and rules remain the same through the adaptations.
It’s important to note that the majority of the digital games that have been picked in this study are created by french producer and developer Asmodee Digital. But with this in mind, all of the game mechanics in the original tabletop games remain the same.
4.1 Carcassonne
Designer: Klaus-Jürgen Wrede Genre: Tile-based, Eurogame
Published: year 2000 by Hans im Glück
Digital Developer: Asmodee Digital, Frima Studio Digital Publisher: Asmodee Digital
Figure 4.1.1 Cover art for the Digital version of Carcassonne.
“Carcassonne is a tile-placement game in which the players draw and place a tile with a piece of southern French landscape on it. The tile might feature a city, a road, a cloister, grassland or some combination thereof, and it must be placed adjacent to tiles that have already been played, in such a way that cities are connected to cities, roads to roads, etcetera. Having placed a tile, the player can then decide to place one of their meeples on one of the areas on it: on the city as a knight, on the road as a robber, on a cloister as a monk, or on the grass as a farmer. When that area is complete, that meeple scores points for its owner [14].”
Analysis
Tile-based Eurogame for 2-5 players. It’s a tile-laying area control game. The players take turns placing connecting tiles to build up cities, fields and roads. Completing projects earns the players Victory points depending on the size of said project. At the end of the game the points are tallied based on controlled tiles and their neighbours.
This is a casual family game and it aims towards players that enjoy casual tile-based games which emphasize strategy and careful planning. There’s a high skill cap due to all the possible paths available. A turn in Carcassonne
1. Draw a tile from the deck. 2. Locate area to place the tile
3. Rotate the tile so that it matches adjacent tiles. 4. Place the tile
5. If possible
a. Area is not occupied by another meeple b. Player has meeples available
6. Place a meeple
a. If the tile leads to an area getting completed i. Roads have crossroads at both ends.
ii. Cities when they have city walls completely surrounding it.
iii. Monasteries have eight neighbouring tiles surrounding it forming a 3x3 with the monastery at the center.
7. The player with a meeple on a finished project gets to pick up their meeple again and is rewarded with Victory points matching the size and type of the project.
8. Turn passes over to the next player.
9. This repeats until the last tile of the deck is played.
The game starts with only one tile present but as the session delves deeper a landscape is soon built with several cities, long roads and monasteries. The randomness that comes from what tile is drawn gives the game a high replayability as no game looks the same.
There are ways for the players to impact each other in detrimental ways but there’s also possibilities for politics. The players can’t play meeples on projects that are already inhabited by another Meeple, but they can do it indirectly if they place a similar tile nearby. As long there’s a tile in between that doesn’t connect the projects the player can place a Meeple there. If these two projects later get connected by a tile, it means that both are working on it and both are rewarded points once the project is finished. However if one of the players somehow manages to get more Meeples than their opponents in a project, it leads to a hostile takeover. Meaning that the player with the more Meeples takes all Reward for the finished project for himself.
Judging from observations and own experiences, the game is considered fair and not based much around luck. The only random factor in the game is what tile the players draw. Other than that there’s no other random factors. There are possibilities to gain an advantage by drawing favorable tiles, it’s more important to play consistently and with good strategies.
Physical version’s estimated play time is between 30 to 90 minutes and digital lies between 15-30 minutes.
4.1.1 Difference between Physical and Digital
The digital version of Carcassonne offers the possibility to play Pass N’ Play, against bots, and through the Online mode. They’ve also added a Matchmaking Rating that adds competitiveness to the Online mode.
At the beginning of the turns the players are given a tile and then must plan out where this tile will be placed. The digital version makes it easier for the player to locate the positions where a tile can be placed by highlighting possible areas. The rotation of each tile is also enforced to follow according to the rules as it doesn’t visualize the incorrect variations of the rotated tiles.
There are a finite amount of tiles with certain patterns that eventually runs out. This runs the risk of certain projects no longer having the chance of being finished due to a certain block has run out. These positions are then highlighted with the color red and a big red cross. Similar mechanics include where the meeples can be placed after putting down a tile. The players can also see how many turns there are left through the tile tracker.
Many of the features in the digital version are implemented to ease the players’ time required to locate areas to place out and position their tiles. These mechanics reduce the time required to play a session.
4.2 Love Letter
Designer: Seiji Kanai
Published: 2012 by Z-Man Games
Genre: Card Game, Strategy, Deduction, Renaissance Digital developer: Nomad Games
Digital publisher: Asmodee Digital Digital release: 2018
Figure 4.2.1 Cover art for the Physical version of Love Letter.
“Love Letter is a game of risk, deduction, and luck for 2–4 players. Your goal is to get your love letter into Princess Annette's hands while deflecting the letters from competing suitors. From a deck with only sixteen cards, each player starts with only one card in hand; one card is removed from play. On a turn, you draw one card, and play one card, trying to expose others and knock them from the game. Powerful cards lead to early gains, but make you a target. Rely on weaker cards for too long, however, and your letter may be tossed in the fire! [15]”
Card game for 2-4 players where the player with the strongest card at the end of the round wins a token. This continues until one player reaches a predetermined number of tokens. It’s a game of deception where the players are trying to figure out the cards of their opponents while keeping their own card a secret. The goal is to end each round with the card with the highest value or take out the competition with deduction. The game is over when a player has reached a certain amount of tokens.
Love Letter targets an audience that enjoys casual games with a focus on deception and deduction. It has simple rules and not a big variety of cards to consider which makes the game easy to pick up. This is for those that enjoy figuring out their opponents patterns and signs while at the same time trying to disguise their own. All of this while trying to remain as anonyme to the other contenders to not become a target.
A turn in Love Letter
1. Draw a card (Should have 2 during your turn)
2. Deduce the optimal course of action depending on the cards in hand a. Offense with cards such as Guard and Baron
b. Control or gather information with cards like Priest, Prince and King c. Defense with Handmaiden
3. Play card. 4. Turn over
There are 16 cards in the deck representing 8 types of characters. Each character carries a value and a feature that is played upon discarding it. The impact of each feature is reflected by the it’s value. The Guard offers the value of 1 and may not win the player a round by biggest value; it carries the feature of taking out an opponent from a round by guessing the correct card that the opponent is holding. On the other hand, there’s the Princess that has the highest value in the game and definitely will win the player the round if it lasts until the last card has been drawn. The downside of the Princess is that if discarded, the player is automatically out of the round. These simple mechanics turn Love Letter into an intriguing game of deception and deduction.
The Challenges the players face in this game is to get a read on their opponents as at the same time not allowing their opponents to get a read on their own card. There are optimal plays in this game turn the game in your favor but these plays have a chance to eventually be predictable. An example of this is only playing a baron when holding the highest card that is the princess. Baron is a card that challenges an opponent in a duel, the duel being about who holds the highest card, the player with lower value is out of the round. There are plenty of ways of mixing up the plays without taking too much of a risk of getting struck out of the rounds.
There are possibilities of unfairness in a game such as this. With most games the cards that are drawn are unpredictable. There are ideal cards to get during certain turns and less than ideal during others. The most ideal card to draw is the Princess during the last turn, that occurs when the last card has been drawn. That usually leads to an auto win. Though there are horrible cards that can lead to an automatic loss. For example if we draw the Princess on the last turn again but this time the other card is the King. The King forces an opponent to swap hands with you, which would lead to giving away the win instead. It’s important to note that the round doesn’t end until the player that drew the last card has played a card which in this case would force the player to play the King and swap.
But in many cases when it comes to card games it’s more important how the game is played rather than relying on luck.
Love Letter has a high replayability due to the variety of possible scenarios. It’s a game with simple rules and only 8 different types of cards but due to the factors to consider and tense situations that may occur is what makes this game feel so rewarding.
4.2.1 Difference between Physical and Digital:
The big difference between the physical and digital versions are sitting face to face in the physical version. In a game of deception and deduction; the players can gather a lot of intel about the players from their “physical tells”. Like many other card games such as Poker, spotting tells and patterns makes a big difference when trying to figure out an opponent’s next move. Spotting physical tells is an impossibility when playing online but there’s still a possibility to spot patterns [16]. Be it how they play depending on what kind of cards they hold or their goals. A factor like physical tells is something that can’t be replicated through a basic digital implementation that doesn’t implement advanced Virtual Reality mechanics.
The Digital version offers the possibilities to play single player against bots, against friends in private multiplayer or against other players in online mode.
4.3 Mysterium
Designer: Oleksandr Nevskiy, Oleg Sidorenko Genre: Cooperative, Mystery
Published: year 2015 by Libellud
Digital Developer: Asmodee Digital, Playsoft Digital Publisher: Asmodee Digital
Digital Release: 2017
Figure 4.3.1 Cover art for the Physical version of Mysterium.
“In Mysterium, a reworking of the game system present in Tajemnicze Domostwo, one player takes the role of ghost while everyone else represents a medium. To solve the crime, the ghost must first recall
(with the aid of the mediums) all of the suspects present on the night of the murder. A number of suspect, location and murder weapon cards are placed on the table, and the ghost randomly assigns one of each of these in secret to a medium [17].”
Cooperative board game with aspects of murder mystery and card-based guessing games for 2-7 players. One player plays as a ghost and the others play as detectives. The ghost can only communicate through cards with images and the detectives need to interpret these card to solve this murder. The game is played for only seven turns in which the detective players have to interpret correctly where the murder was done, the murder weapon and the murderer. If the murderer is discovered then everyone wins, if the wrong person is picked as the murderer or the turns run out then everyone loses. Estimated play time is 40 minutes for the physical version, and about 10 to 20 minutes for the digital version. Mysterium was chosen to represent the genre of cooperative deductive mystery games. The choice to use Mysterium over other games such as Clue were the cooperative aspect. None of the other chosen games features any intentional cooperative play.
Formal Elements
The Ghost is a role one of the players chose to play as. At the start of the game the Ghost takes 3 cards from 3 different decks for each other player in the game. These cards represent each player’s murder suspect, the place of the murder, and the murder weapon. The Ghost keeps these cards hidden from the other players.
The other players all play a Medium who communes with the Ghost player using Vision cards to guess who their murder suspect, place of murder, and murder weapon is.
The Vision cards are used by the Ghost to provide hints to the other players. They are the only means of communication the Medium players have with the Ghost player. Each turn the Ghost takes 7 Vision cards and gives a Medium player 1 or more Vision cards. The Ghost refills their hand to be 7 Vision cards after each Medium player gets their Vision cards.
Each Medium player has Clairvoyance tokens to use. Their function is for players to either agree or disagree what another player’s guess is. If the player who used their Clairvoyance token is correct they recieve Clairvoyance points to use in the Epilogue round.
In the Epilogue round the Ghost shuffles the different murderer suspect, murder location, and murder weapon cards and picks a new combination cards. The Ghost player then picks 3 Vision cards, one for the suspect, one for the location and one for the weapon. How many of these Vision cards a player can see depends on a Medium player’s Clairvoyance points. First the Mediums with the least points see the first Vision card. These players then make their guess on the murder combination. Afterwards the player’s who fill the required points to see the second card get to see that Vision card and make their guesses. Finally the last card is revealed for those who unlocked all cards and they get to guess. The Epilogue round does not start until all Medium Players reach it.
If the correct combination of murder suspect, murder location and murder weapon are chosen then all players win. If not then everyone loses.
A turn in Mysterium
1. Ghost player draws 7 Vision cards.
2. The Ghost player gives the first Medium player 1 to 7 Vision cards the Ghost player thinks contain hints pointing towards the Medium player’s suspect card.
3. The Ghost draws new Vision cards until their hand contains 7 Vision cards and repeats step 2. This repeats for each Medium player until all have received their Vision cards.
4. The Medium players now use the Vision cards to attempt to find the right clue connecting the Vision card with their suspect card.
5. The Medium players make their guesses on their individual suspects. 6. Each Medium player now has a chance to use their Clairvoyance tokens.
7. The Ghost player reveals if a Medium players guess is correct or not. The Mediums who were right moving on to the next level, which is either location, murder weapon or the Epilogue round.
8. The Clairvoyance Points are counted based on the amount of correct Clairvoyance tokens. 9. If the Ghost player has any Vision cards left on their hand at the end of the turn these carry over
to the next turn. 10. Turn is over.
Mysterium being a guessing game means it involves a fair bit of luck. From the Ghost player’s luck with drawing their Vision cards to the Medium players’ guesses.
The latter example however can be either luck or skill, or both depending on the player. Some players can see a connection between several Vision cards and take a guess based on their own deduction. A skillful Ghost player could do the same when giving a Medium player their cards. The skill part of Mysterium lies in being able to make the connections.
4.3.1 Difference between Physical and Digital
The ghost player has to drag and drop each vision card onto the medium players’ suspect cards and press a confirm button to hand them their cards.
The clairvoyance tokens and the amount available to use are set into the UI. The medium players have to drag and drop from the UI and place them on the players they think are correct or incorrect in their suspect guess. Each medium players’ clairvoyance score is also kept on the UI next to the token amount instead of the designed archway in the physical version. The ghost players raven tokens are applied on the same UI border.
In the online version the medium players have access to a chat which the ghost player is unable to see or enter. For local play they offer the possibility to play pass and play which rely on the medium players not
peeking on the ghost player when it is their turn, a warning is given when the medium player's turn ends to prevent them accidently peeking.
In Pass N’ Play the medium players are still capable of socially interacting with one another like in the physical version. For the ghost player it does not change as their role is to not speak in both versions of the game.
4.4 Small World
Designer: Philippe Keyaerts
Illustration: Miguel Coimbra and Cyrille Daujean Genre: Strategy
Published: year 2009 by Days of Wonder Digital Developer: Days of Wonder
Digital Publisher: Days of Wonder, Asmodee Digital Digital Release: 2013
Figure 4.4.1 Cover art for the Physical version of Small World.
Small World is a strategy, simulation game for 2-5 players. The base game offers 14 different races and 20 unique special powers and several maps that are chosen based on the amount of participants. Formal Elements
At the beginning of the game six races and special powers are offered and each player gets to choose a combination they believe will help them conquer areas and gather as many coins at the end of the turn. Each race and special power offers a unique ability and will encourage the players to adjust their strategies based on these features. At the end of each turn the player gets coins based on the race, special powers and amount of territories occupied.
A turn in Small World
1. There are 2 options in the beginning of the turn
a. Put race into decline that leads to the end of the turn.
i. Going into Decline means that the player has chosen to pick a new race. This forces the current race to turn upside down and can’t be played anymore. Can only have one race in decline at the time.
ii. Next turn the player is allowed to pick a new race and play it as the new active race.
b. Play turn as normal and continue down the
2. Get tokens that the player can use to take new areas. They get it from: a. Areas that have more than one token.
b. From areas that have been lost during opponents’ turns. 3. Conquer new areas using tokens and some special powers.
a. If the player doesn’t have enough tokens to take over an area they have the option to roll an reinforcement die that adds to the amount of tokens used to attack.
4. Redeploy phase. Tokens that are not required to hold down a territory are given back to the player. With these tokens they can place them out on areas to bolster their defenses.
5. Gather Coins based on:
a. The amount of areas the player occupies. This includes the race that’s in Decline. b. Race’s special ability.
c. Special Power’s. 6. Turn is over.
Note: Races and Special Powers may affect how a turn is played.
4.4.1 Difference between Physical and Digital
The digital version of Small World offers the possibility to play Pass N’ Play, against bots, Local games over WiFi and through the Online mode. The online also adds a Matchmaking Rating that offers competitiveness to the online games.
The physical version involves managing many tokens which becomes obsolete in the digital version as the game itself manages that part. Tokens that need to be redeployed after losing a battle or failing a reinforcement are automatically given back to the player to redeploy.
Some of the more unique racial and special powers abilities get highlighted to indicate that they’re active. An example of this is the sorcerer’s ability to transform a lonely token on an area into a sorcerer token.
The players’ combat turn is over once they’re out of tokens to place, after they’ve done a reinforcement roll or pressed the redeploy button.
Going into decline can be a bit confusing at first as the button is simply a picture of a pillar without giving any context while hovering over it. When picking a new combination a window opens up and shows the same information that is on the physical sheets that comes with the game.
4.5 Ticket to Ride
Designer: Alan R. Moon Genre: Family, Wargames
Published: year 2004 by Days of Wonder Digital Developer: Days of Wonder
Digital Publisher: Days of Wonder, Asmodee Digital Digital Release: 2012
Figure 4.5.1 Cover art for the Physical version of Ticket to Ride.
“With elegantly simple gameplay, Ticket to Ride can be learned in under 15 minutes. Players collect cards of various types of train cars they then use to claim railway routes in North America. The longer the routes, the more points they earn. Additional points come to those who fulfill Destination Tickets – goal cards that connect distant cities; and to the player who builds the longest continuous route [18].”
Ticket to Ride is a family railway game for 2 to 5 players. The goal of the game is to claim railway routes for points. Physical version takes 30-60 minutes to play and the digital version 20-40 minutes.
Formal Elements
At the start of the game each player picks a colour to play as and 45 train cars of the same colour. Next the player picks 2 destination tickets from a choice of 3 random ones picked from a shuffled deck. Any tickets not chosen will be put in the bottom of the destination ticket deck. Each player then receives 4 train cards from the train card deck to start them off. 5 more cards are then drawn from the same deck and placed face up and these are the revealed cards.
During a player's turn they are allowed to pick 2 new cards from the shuffled deck, the revealed cards or a mix of both. If one of the revealed cards is a locomotive card then a player is only able to pick one card should they pick the locomotive card. A player can also decide to instead pick 1 to 3 new destination tickets to add to the tickets chosen at the start of the game. A final option for the player is to use their train cards to claim a train route if they have the corresponding amount of train cards with the same colour as the route. A player can claim any route not already claimed by another player.
The game enters the final turn when one player has two or fewer train car tokens left. At the end of the final turn the points are initially counted based on the amount of train cars placed, the length of the route and a 10 point bonus to the player with the longest continuously connected set of routes. Then the players reveal their destination tickets to add the points shown on the ticket to their score if they successfully completed the route, with points subtracted for any incomplete routes. The player with the highest score at the end of the session wins.
A turn in Ticket to Ride
1. There are 4 options in the beginning of the turn
a. Pick 2 train cards from either the shuffled deck or the revealed cards. b. Pick 1 locomotive card from the revealed cards.
c. Pick 1 to 3 new destination tickets.
d. Claim a train route with the players available train cards. 2. Turn is over.
Judging based on observations and our own play sessions, the game has a fair mix of luck and skill. The biggest random factors being what train and destination tickets the players draw as well as the selection of revealed train cards. These factors decide what possibilities each player has. There is still room for strategies such as how to hide which routes the players are building for and blocking other players by taking routes they were building for. What cards a player choses from the revealed cards also encourages players to use their observation skill to predict what other players are aiming for.
4.5.1 Difference between Physical and Digital
The player tokens are handled by the UI. The amount of placeable trains and score is tracked and updated in the lower right corner. Each player's cards are likewise kept in the lower part of the screen. If a collection of same colored train cards are selected it is possible to hover over train routes to see if it’s possible to claim that route with the cards selected.
To get a new destination or train cards their respective decks have to be pressed. This either opens up a selection of destination tickets to choose from or give the player a new train card.
The digital version of Ticket to Ride offers the possibility to play Pass’N’Play, against bots, Local games over WiFi and through the Online mode. Playing it pass and play does limit the social aspects of playing as each player has to take care not to look as the turn skips from one player to the next.
There are no changes to the game mechanics between the physical and digital versions beyond visual representation and those which have already been mentioned previously.
4.6 Twilight Struggle
Designer: Ananda Gupta, Jason Matthews Genre: Strategy, Wargames
Digital Developer: Playdec, Inc Digital Publisher: Asmodee Digital Digital Release: 2016
Figure 4.6.1 Cover art for the Physical version of Twilight Struggle.
“Twilight Struggle inherits its fundamental systems from the card-driven classics We the People[19] and Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage[20]. It is a quick-playing, low-complexity game in that tradition. The game map is a world map of the period, where players move units and exert influence in attempts to gain allies and control for their superpower. As with GMT's other card-driven games, decision-making is a challenge; how to best use one's cards and units given consistently limited resources [21].“
Twilight Struggle is a strategy wargame for 2 players set in the Cold War. A player can play as either the USA or the USSR, with the other player playing as the one not chosen. Players take turns playing cards for either their Event effect or the Operation Value the card has. The Operation Value determines how much Influence the player can invest into taking control of countries on the game board map. The game is set up into 3 stages called the Early War, Mid War, and the Late War. These stages are divided over 10 turns.
Formal Elements
The cards in Twilight Struggle have both an Event and an Operations Value on them. They are either coloured red, white, or split between both red and white. Red represents cards with Events meant for the USSR and white for the USA. If a player plays a card not meant for their faction then the Event always triggers. There are 3 different types of cards. The first and most common one is the Event card. Another type of card that a player can draw from the deck is a Scoring card which cannot be held at the end of a turn and must be played before then. The Scoring card has 3 different brackets for the region it affects, the first is Presence which awards Victory Points if a player controls at least one country within the region. The second bracket is Domination where a player has to control more battleground countries
and non-battleground countries in the region to earn Victory Points. The last bracket is Control where a player has to control all battleground countries and more countries overall within the region.
The final card type is called the China card and there is only one of these cards in the entire game. The USSR starts with this card. It gets passed over to the other player if played.
Influence Points are used to place into taking control of countries across the game map. This is done either by a Coup, Realignment, or placing points into an unclaimed country. The points necessary to take control of an unclaimed country is the stability score of that country with the opponent players placed Influence added on should they have any in that country. The player can only place Influence in countries that are adjacent to countries they already have Influence in at the start of that round.
Coups are another way to take control of a country the opponent already has Influence in. If a Coup is attempted in a country designated as a Battleground by the game board then the DEFCON Status gets lowered by 1. Coups are calculated by adding together the Operations Value on the card played with a die roll then subtracting that with the Stability score of the country multiplied by 2. This value is how much Influence the other player loses in that country and any left over is how much Influence the player gains.
Realignment rolls have the same region-restrictions as Coups and the simple Influence investment. Each player rolls a die and adds a +1 to the roll for each adjacent country that they control, +1 if it’s adjacent to their main country, and +1 if they have more Influence than their opponent in the country. The player with the highest roll gets to remove the other player’s Influence in the target country by an amount equal to the difference between the players rolls. Realignment does not decrease DEFCON Status. DEFCON Status is represented by a scale of 5 to 1 where 5 is peace and 1 is nuclear war. If the DEFCON Status reaches 1 the game is over and the player who lowered it loses. 4 to 2 on the scale symbolises conflict and prevents the players from attempting Coups or Realignment rolls in certain areas of the game world depending on the DEFCON Status value.
The Space Race Track works by using Operations Points to move up the Space Race Track. Once the Operations Points are spent the player rolls a dice and if the dice roll is within the required score the player moves up the Space Race Track. The first player to reach a new level of the track gets more Victory Points. At certain levels the player gets other bonuses such as using two cards on the Space Race Track per turn.
Military Operations Status is checked at the end of a turn. It goes from 1 to 5 and represents the amount of military operations a player has done, such as coups. Every player needs to do the same amount of military operations as the DEFCON level and any point away from that amount gives Victory Points to the opposing player. The Military Operations Status resets to 0 each new turn.
A player wins if the other player reaches DEFCON 1 on their Action Round. Another way to win is when a player has Control level on Europe when the Score card for Europe is played. The Event card named
Wargames being triggered also results in a win. If one player reaches +20 on the Victory Point scale they win. The Victory Point scale is shared between both players and each positive point or negative point moves the score to one player's benefit. If no player triggers any of the previously mentioned win conditions then at turn 10 whoever has the most Victory Points is declared the winner.
A turn in Twilight Struggle
1. The turn begins with the DEFCON Status being raised by 1 up to a maximum of 5.
2. Then each player gets dealt cards from the current stage deck until their hand contains 8 cards. 3. Next comes the Headline Phase. Each player has to select 1 card from their hand to reveal at the
same time. The card with the highest Operations Value is played first. If the Operation Value is the same on both cards then the US player’s card is played first. The Event on the card is then carried out followed by the Event on the other player’s card.
4. The Action Rounds happen after the Headline Phase. The Action Rounds last for a total of 6-8 rounds depending on the war stage of the game. During the Action Rounds both players go back and forth playing their cards. There are 3 options of what to play the card as.
a. Play the card for its Operations Value.
i. Place the Operations Value as Influence points into controlling a country. ii. Attempt a Coup.
iii. Realignment roll. b. Play the card for its Event.
c. Use the card to further the player on the Space Race Track. 5. Check Military Operations Status
6. The player with the China Card has the option to use it. 7. Advance turn marker.
8. Turn is over.
Twilight Struggle has elements of luck such as the dice rolls and drawn cards. There is also much room for strategy concerning what to do with the cards. A player could decide to hold onto cards that are beneficial to the opposing player to keep them from getting it themselves. Using cards that are detrimental to the player on the Space Race Track is also an option for off-loading cards.
4.6.1 Difference between Physical and Digital
Twilight Struggle’s digital version features online, local, against an AI, and hotseat play. There are many tokens and cards to keep track of in the physical version, these are handled by the UI in the digital edition.
The digital version gives suggestions of what to do with event cards such as play events or place influence. The computer handles the updates of the DEFCON status, the Military Operations status and the Space Race status.
The way Twilight Struggle’s game mechanics function does not change beyond the resource and score management in the digital version.
Having all the information handled by the computer allows for quicker matches. All hotseat digital games face the potential issue of players attaining information about the other player when turns
change, Twilight Struggle does as well. Social conversations between the two players for hotseat change as players cannot view the other playing their turn without peeking.
4.7 UNO
Designer: Merle Robbins Genre: Family, Card Game
Published: year 1971 by International Games, Inc Digital Version Name: UNO With Friends
Digital Developer: Digital Attitude Games Digital Publisher: Digital Attitude Games Digital Release: 2019
Figure 4.7.1 Box for the Physical version of UNO.
“Players race to empty their hands and catch opposing players with cards left in theirs, which score points. In turns, players attempt to play a card by matching its color, number, or word to the topmost card on the discard pile. If unable to play, players draw a card from the draw pile, and if still unable to play, they pass their turn. Wild and special cards spice things up a bit [22].”
UNO is a family card game for 2-10 players. The objective of the game is to be the first player to reach 500 points. Estimated play time is 30 minutes.
Formal Elements
Each new game round starts with each player being dealt 7 cards. The dealer then takes 1 card and flips it over face up, this card starts the discard pile. Beginning clockwise from the dealer the players play one card each turn. This card has to match either the colour or the symbol off the top card in the discard pile. If the first card in the discard pile is a special card then one of five rules apply.
● If the first card is a draw 4 wild card it gets shuffled back into the deck and another card is drawn.
● If the first card is a regular wild card the first player picks a colour to start with. ● If the first card is a draw 2 card the first player draws 2 cards and skips their turn. ● If the first card is a reverse card the dealer goes first.
● If the first card is a skip card then the first player skips their turn. There are 6 different types of cards in UNO.
● The most common card is the coloured number card. They come in 4 colours which are red, green, blue and yellow. The number on the card represents the point value of that card at the end of the round. Within the round the card can be placed in the discard pile if the number or colour is the same as the last card in the discard pile.
● The reverse card likewise comes in the 4 colours mentioned. It can be placed in the discard pile if it has the same colour or symbol as the last card in the discard pile. If played the order of play reverses.
● The skip card can be played in the same manner as the reverse card. If played the next player skips their turn.
● The draw 2 cards work the same way as skip cards with the addition of the next player also having to draw 2 turns while skipping their turn.
● The wild card is playable whenever a player has one. It is used to change the colour played to any of the 4 colours the game uses. The next card played has to have the same colour but not a matching symbol.
● The draw 4 wild card can be played whenever a player doesn't have a card matching the colour played. If played the next player has to draw 4 cards and skip their turn and the player who played the card gets to decide the new colour. The player about to draw 4 cards can challenge the other player if they believe they played the draw 4 card illegally. That player then has to show that player their hand. If the card is played illegally then the one who played the card draws 4 cards instead and returns the draw 4 card to their hand. If however the player did follow the rules then the challenger draws 2 additional penalty cards.
If a player has no cards that can be legally played then they may draw one card from the deck. If this card can be played they may immediately do so. A player may also choose not to play despite being able to and instead draw a card.
If a player still can not play then their turn is skipped.
By the time a player has only 1 card left on their hand they have to call out UNO. If other players catch them not saying UNO then they have to draw 2 penalty cards. If nobody notices a player not saying UNO when that player only has 1 card left then there is no penalty.
It is valid to win a round ending with any of the 6 different cards.
Once a player has shed all their cards they are declared the winner of that round. They receive points from any unplayed cards their opponents have on their hands. The numbered cards give their face value in points. Reverse, skip and draw 2 cards give 20 points. Wild card and draw 4 wild card gives 50 points. The first player to 500 points wins the entire game.
A turn in UNO
1. At the start of a player’s turn they have 3 options. a. Place any legal card on the discard pile.
b. Choose not to play a card and draw a new card. They may choose to either play this card or keep it.
c. Have no legal card and be forced to draw a card. They may play this card if it is a legal card, otherwise they keep it on their hand.
2. The other players play their cards clockwise, or counterclockwise should a reverse card get played, until all have played.
3. Turn is over.
UNO contains a fair mix of luck and skill. Luck decides what cards each player draws while skill decides what a player does with the cards. Through observing play sessions it is noticeable that skill plays an important part in when to play a game changing card. Holding onto a draw 4 card for example can allow a player to make an opponent skip their turn so that the player can shed their final cards the next turn without the opponent interfering.
4.7.1 Difference between Physical and Digital
UNO With Friends features offline play against AIs, online match-making and being able to set up an online match against friends. The user experience playtests were conducted using the online play with friends mode.
The cards are handled by the computer. The computer delivers a prompt to draw a new card if no legal move is possible with the players current hand. The option to challenge a player who uses the draw 4 card is not present in the digital version. The computer prevents illegal use of cards such as using the draw 4 card when another card can be played.
There is another rule change between the digital and the physical version. Draw 4 cards can be played whenever and not only when there are no cards with the same colour as the last card in the discard pile. The digital version does not feature voice communication between players in the online mode. The text communication is limited to prewritten phrases and emojis.
5. Results & Analysis
Disclaimer: 20-30 people were asked to do the tests, only a few were able to attend due to the Covid-19 situation and how the tests were conducted.
5.1 Carcassonne
Figure 5.1.1. Carcassonne UX Diagram
On the diagram in figure 5.1.1 we can see a high score in Usability in favor of the Digital and relatively low for Physical. The biggest issue revolved around calculating the Victory Points. In the physical version there were issues with knowing how many points were awarded for finished projects and calculating the points at the end of the session. In the digital versions the players can get an overview over what the Fields cover but in the physical version the players need to figure out how far it expands depending on the tiles. Ultimately this led to more work and time spent during each turn and in the last phase where the players collect the points for unfinished projects and fields. What followed with the digital’s higher efficiency was that the players remained more engaged with what was happening during each turn. On the other hand the slower pace of the Physical version also led to a rather high Social Connectivity compared to the Digital. After combining all the factors, the average were 78.1 points to Digital and 72.7 points to Physical showing that it’s more enjoyable on PC.
We had 8 playtesters for this game, all experienced gamers. There were five males and three females with the age span between 24-37. Three of them were not able to make a physical appearance which resulted in them only being able to evaluate the Digital version. The number of players that partook in each playtest varied between 3-5.
![Figure 2.3.1 Represents the number of board games published every year up to 2015 [9]](https://thumb-eu.123doks.com/thumbv2/5dokorg/4167076.90120/5.918.110.748.219.570/figure-represents-number-board-games-published-year.webp)
