The first playtesting session aimed to evaluate several key aspects of the game. We focused on understanding the game's pace and clarity from the players' perspective. Additionally, we wanted to assess how players interacted with one another and with the game components.
After the first test, we identified several areas for improvement. The game's duration was too long, which made it less suitable for its primary context – classroom use. Players also expressed a sense of limited agency, feeling disconnected from the game's progression. In response, we redesigned the game board to reduce the number of spaces and replaced some random elements with moments that allowed for more player decision‑making.
Following these changes, we conducted a second round of playtesting. While we observed improvements, new areas for refinement emerged. For example, we realized that reducing the number of neutral spaces on the board would help make the game more dynamic.
These first two playtests, conducted with i3S researchers, were valuable from both a scientific and educational perspective. However, it was essential to gather feedback from the game's primary audience: high school students. To this end, we conducted a third playtest with a group of students, using a revised version of the low‑fidelity prototype that incorporated the previous findings. This session confirmed that the game achieved its educational and engagement goals, with only minor details requiring further refinement.
