Category: research

Product Research & Design – take the gamble out of game purchasing

A. In the first part of this case study, I discuss a business- and user problem in the boardgame retail space, and its significance.

B. Second, based on my foundational research I identify various user segments and how they solve for this problem. I will also discuss solutions developed for adjacent categories (books, movies), and see how those solutions can be used as blueprints for boardgames.

C. Third, I will share my design process about the board game recommender interface.

The Problem: Game purchases are a risky investment

Purchasing games without adequate research is risky for the consumer – making it unlikely for them to buy games in the store without advance research . This is a significant issue because tabletop games (boardgames) are increasingly high-revenue generating business.

The US makes more revenue from board games than any other country ($2.48 billion), followed by China ($1.10 billion) and Japan ($0.46 billion).1

Research: validates the problem and maps user expectations

Methods:

  1. Preliminary survey of 52 respondents recruited through board game fan pages on Facebook to validate the problem the app is designed to solve
  2. In-depth interviews and concept testing of wireframes
  3. Competitive analysis

Insights and Personas

Shoppers need to invest time and effort into researching games before entering the store:

    My study found that a common- and sometimes surprisingly challenging – issue for gamers was finding the right game to play. Many users have come up with several workarounds, however, all of these are performed as a preparation, and not in the store. These include:

    • posting questions in Facebook groups
    • visiting Reddit pages
    • doing in-depth research on BoardGameGeek, the ultimate database for boardgames
    • watching YouTube videos
    • asking around among friends

    95% of game shoppers consult at least 2 information sources to guide their purchasing decision, and close to 75% visit at least 3 sources!

    Datasource: survey conducted in April 2025, participants recruited through board game community pages on Facebook.

    The survey results show that the information on the game packaging and mainstream retail websites e.g., Amazon.com, are perceived as inadequate. Not a single respondent would make a shopping decision just based on those.

    Game price determines the amount of research shoppers do

    The extent of research consumers undertake is directly related to the game’s price – the more expensive the game, the more thorough their investigation before purchasing, supporting the problem statement that game purchasing is seen as an investment. Therefore, when designing detailed product information pages, it’s important to prioritize high-prized games.

    Distinct shopper personas: BGG-users are more sophisticated in their information need than non-BGG users

    There are systematic differences between BGG (boardgamegeek)-users vs. non-users.

    Channel Preference
    BGG users prefer specialty stores (online and physical game retailers), whereas non-BGG users tend to shop at big box stores. This fits with the persona of BGG users, who are more game-savvy and look for more in-depth, strategic games that are not normally carried in non-speciality stores.
    Satisfaction with retail websites

    Both BGG and non-BGG shoppers are moderately satisfied with the information they find on the retail website (3.58 +/- 0.62 vs. 3.21+/- 1.18 on a 1-5 scale) but as the SE values (0.62 vs. 1.18) show, BGG shoppers are more in agreement with each other, whereas some non-BGG shoppers are highly satisfied, and other non-BGG shoppers are not at all.

    TYPES OF information RELEVANT FOR DECISION MAKING

    Evidently, some pieces of information are a lot more important when making a purchasing decision than others. What is more surprising is that certain crucial characteristics (such as how easy a game is to learn, or how much replay value it has) are rarely included in game product pages.

    Most importantly, non-BGG users have a significantly higher information need in almost all categories, except for game studio, which only even for sophisticate gamers

    This graph highlights the most relevant differences between BGG and Non-BGG users. Time to Play – BGG users are significantly MORE likely to find this crucial (51.6% vs 18.8%) Photos – BGG users are LESS likely to find this crucial (38.7% vs 68.8%); Age Requirements – BGG users are LESS likely to find this crucial (9.7% vs 37.5%); Instructions – BGG users are LESS likely to find this crucial (19.4% vs 43.8%)

    Starting with Minimal Viable Product

    I originally planned to create a game recommender that would come up with ideas based on previous game purchases, however, I decided to start with an MVP

    Here are a few examples:

    Overall, player count, game photos, play time and game type are the most relevant search criteria. More granular details such as game expansions, the name of the game studio, and what other games the studio designed are seen as less important.

    WIREFRAMES AND HIIGH FIDELITY DESIGNS WILL BE DISPLAYED HERE IN A FEW DAYS

    https://www.technavio.com/report/tabletop-games-market-industry-analysis

    https://www.businessresearchinsights.com/market-reports/board-game-market-117710

    Posted on

    If only we could talk to more of our users …. B2B edition

    The bane of any UX researcher’s work is finding participants to get relevant information. Well, in some B2C contexts it may not be so difficult, as long as you make sure your participants are indeed the ones you want to talk to – more on screening willing people as often some are just not who they claim to be.

    B2B is a different beast – here are some ideas to consider:

    Your pool is limited

    There are only so many people who you can talk to – maybe your company has 100 clients and you can talk to them only so many times.

    What can you do?

    1. Get creative with recruitment – go to conferences and trade meetings, use connections, but stop at kidnappings.
    2. Leverage look-alike audiences – think about what other groups of people are similar to your target audience. E.g., you need to talk to pharmacists placing orders on your website. What other people place orders and have to contend with strict regulations?
    3. Create a research program

    Your pool is shared

    An extra challenge is that the pie of potential participants is “nibbled on” by other segments of your company, most often the product and marketing teams. If you get a client to talk to, they will often complain that they have “already explained it to your colleague just a week ago”. This is frustrating to both sides. Or, the company will have a list of potential participants, shared by the departments and whoever gets to the list first, wins.

    What can you do?

    1. Collaborate with Customer success reps –
      • They want the same things as you do – get satisfied customers, who are happy with the service and/or feel listened to.
      • They have a wealth of information that you can mine, to the extent that you may not even need to talk to an end user, OR know which customers are the most worthwhile to talk to AND get the relevant context so that your customers do not have to repeat themselves.
    2. Establish guidelines and guardrails for your colleagues.
      • Share the information you have already collected – UX researchers can often answer questions that the marketing team wants to know, and vice versa.
      • Combine questions you would pursue in a conversation with a client. Often clients do not need to interface with two different professionals from your company when answering a few questions.
      • Create a spreadsheet with contact information and a schedule for accessing your clients. Agree on the frequency of contact and how you divide up the access times.

    Your participants are busy professionals

    This needs no explanation or elaboration

    What can you do?

    1. Make is frictionless and easy for your participants to sign up. Basically, apply your UX knowledge to reduce any frustration:
      • make your invitation email clear and easy to understand, and scan. If in doubt, A/B test your invitation email for future recruitment efforts
      • If you need your participants to sign any NDAs, include the link in the invitation email.
      • Offer a direct link to schedule, and enable the participant to automatically add it to their calendar
    2. Schedule shorter sessions
      • I know, this one is painful but you are more likely to recruit your target audience
      • Often, your busy participants realize how important and/or enjoyable it is to talk to you. They will then extend the session, or want to schedule a follow-up session.

    How about incentives?

    This is where the legal department enters the scene. Quite often, your B2B participants are not allowed to accept financial incentives. But here are the plus sides (though you may look at not having to pay already a plus side):

    • B2B participants (assuming they are your clients, and not look-alikes) are heavily invested in improving your product as they are the primary beneficiaries.
    • Offering to send a token of appreciation (e.g, mug, Tshirt) is often received with gratitude and grace, but really, nothing replaces a heartfelt, genuine thank you from you!

    Posted on

    User Testing with Minors

    Minors (people under the age of 18) encompass a wide range of levels in physical, social, emotional and cognitive development. Accordingly, some of the guidelines vary based on the participants’ age, while some of them are applicable for all ages. 

    Overall Guidelines 

    Recruiting

    1. While teenagers can be reached directly by posting on social media or in public places (libraries, schools, gyms, malls, etc.), most recruiters go directly to the parents. Minors under the age of 18 in the US, and 16 in the UK (no matter how mature they are) are not allowed to participate in studies without parental/guardian consent. Note: The age of majority in ALL US states is 18 or higher (unless someone is an emancipated adult by getting married or having a child younger) https://minors.uslegal.com/age-of-majority/
    2. Besides getting written consent from the parent/legal guardian, researchers also need to get participants’ agreement, a.k.a. assent, which does not need to be in writing. Assent is the informed consent given by the minor – this needs to be communicated in an age-appropriate manner. So while minors are not allowed to participate in research without consent from their legal guardian, they themselves are required to give assent – an informed consent as a second requirement for the study.
    3. Talk though the assent form days before the research. This accomplishes two things:
      1. Making sure that the minor participant understands what is asked of them to ensure an informed assent.
      2. Screening for sociable participants as many kids and teenagers are shy with strangers. 
    4. Recruit more than the number of participants needed because the risk of something happening that prevents a participant from showing up is doubled when a parent needs to provide transportation to the testing facility.
    5. As both the parent and the minor are involved, make sure you offer compensation to both of them. While cash is appreciated by everyone, younger people appreciate gift cards to their favorite online and brick-and-mortar stores. 
    6. Try advertising in places where parents are likely to hang out:
      1. Offline, using fliers in public places
        1. Storytime places
        2. Extracurricular programs for kids (swim school, indoor playgrounds, children’s museum, YMCA, etc.)
      2. Online:
        1. Facebook groups involving parents
        2. Post ads on relevant websites, use GoogleAds, or Facebook Banner
    7. In your recruiting material, spell out the following pieces of information:
      1. Targeting criteria (What kind of participants you are looking for)
      2. Incentives (In what ways participants will benefit – not just financially. Many children are happy to help if they see the research as a worthwhile activity)
      3. Logistics (time commitment and location) 
      4. Sign-up information (URL, email, phone number)

    COPPA – The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, a federal law

    Effective starting April 2000, revised in 2008

    1. Applicable to any website/application that may collect information from children under the age of 13. This federal law requires that the website/application discuss – in terms that are understandable to children – the following
      1. The child is not asked to provide any more information than necessary for participation
      2. Their parent can refuse the information collected on the minor, can request to have it deleted, and refuse further collection or use of information and explains how to do this. 
      3. Name and contact information of all operators collecting and maintaining the information
      4. The kinds of information being held and how the information is being collected. 
      5. How the operator will use the information.
      6. Whether the information is disclosed to 3rd parties and if so, who they are, and what it is for, and giving the parent the option to opt-out of sharing the information with 3rd party 
      7. See Nickelodeon’s website information for example.
    Mother and daughter each on their computers, working
    Photo by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

    Conducting Research

    General Guidelines

    1. Dress casually
    2. Building trust is crucial – set a friendly tone by sharing information about yourself so that they can relate to you.
    3. Promote a casual and fun atmosphere.
    4. Tailor your language to the kids. Remember, they don’t want to be considered younger than their age,at the same time, you don’t want to be obscure.
    5. Make sure you are prepared with a variety of activities – younger people tend to complete the usability tasks faster, and are satisfied once they get an acceptable answer. Unlike older participants, they tend not to double check their work!
    6. Vary up the activity at least every 20 minutes, or more frequently depending on how fast your minor participants get bored.
    7. Bring plenty of materials such as paper, scissors, markers, etc.
    8. Encourage them to give a free answer by using creative techniques such as word associations, drawings, fill-in-the-gaps.
    9. Understand that children’s everyday experience will strongly influence their answers till they reach the maturity level of abstract thinking and hypotheticals (around age 11).

    Broken down by Age Groups

    Under the age of 3

    • Hard to research but is possible starting at around 18 months
    • Test material must have visual and physical elements to it
    • Make sure that toddlers react to your test material and not to you.
    • They need to be in their own environment (at home, with their usual caregiver)

    Between 3 and 6 of age

    • Lay down the ground rules at the beginning of the session
    • Testing material must be visual
    • Tap into their imagination and empower them with role play – Preschool children tend to be highly creative.
    • Still important to have an adult they know around to provide reassurance to them

    Between 6 and 11

    • As their memory is still limited, make the stimulus available right in front of them
    • Best to interview them with a friend

    Between 11 and 16

    • Teenagers are generally capable of abstract thinking: they are able to engage in in-depth discussions about hypothetical issues (what ifs)
    • They want to be treated like adults – that way they are more likely to respond maturely and share their ideas.
    • They are proud and happy to talk about their personal interests and tastes. It is important to treat them as individuals and not to patronise them.
    • Paired interviews often allow them to share more freely

    Sources:

    Protected: Work Samples

    This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below: