Comparative Analysis of Urban and Metropolis Games: A Typology and Evaluation Framework for Participatory and Educational City-Making

Abstract

Contemporary cities and metropolises, as complex spatial and social structures, require innovative tools for promotion, education, and the identification of development potential. The search for such tools prompted the authors to conduct the research. This article attempts to assess the effectiveness of urban and metropolitan games as tools of territorial marketing and as means of supporting spatial education and social participation. The research is based on the analysis of 42 games with urban and metropolitan themes, selected according to defined criteria. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods were applied, including documentation analysis, comparative analysis techniques, statistical methods, case studies, and coding of games across seven parameters (dimensions), using five descriptors (coded 1–5) per parameter. The research results indicate a high diversity among the analyzed games in terms of structure, function, and application. The proposed typology of games allowed for an in-depth, systematic comparison. The identification of five typological clusters allowed for an assessment of the advantages and limitations of individual game forms. This provided data on the suitability of individual game types for various purposes, including their application in territorial marketing and urban education. The findings confirm that urban and metropolitan games can play a significant role in building spatial awareness, supporting planning processes, and promoting urban areas. They represent an innovative tool supporting the sustainable development of cities and metropolises, particularly in the areas of resident engagement in decision-making processes, collaboration between authorities, residents, and non-governmental organizations, planning with consideration for future generations, as well as fostering—even among the younger generation—a sense of shared responsibility for urban space and the decisions undertaken.

1. Introduction

The issue of metropolises understood as urban structures is often complex. Metropolises, being administrative entities, are in reality a shared potential of many urban structures forming a single metropolitan organism. Due to the complexity of metropolises, knowledge about their components is often dispersed, while metropolitan marketing is highly condensed. The term metropolis, derived from the Greek word μητρόπολις (metrópolis), means “mother city” or “capital.” In academic literature, a metropolis is defined as a large city or conurbation, often with a population exceeding one million, which constitutes a significant economic, political, and cultural area for a country or region. Markowski and Marszał, in their publication “Metropolises, Metropolitan Areas, Metropolization—Problems and Basic Concepts”, define a metropolis as a functional unit created by a large, complex, and functionally coherent urban ensemble, whose essential feature is the presence of metropolitan functions and functional connections [1]. A metropolis is characterized by high-quality services, institutions, and infrastructure, as well as significant innovative potential in various fields such as economics, technology, society, politics, and culture. A metropolis also stands out due to its uniqueness and specific place-based characteristics. Metropolises are central decision-making points in the global economy. An important aspect is also their participation in global connections and migratory flows, as well as the functional specialization and diversity of society and infrastructure. Metropolises play a crucial role in managing the flows of goods, people, and information, and are also seats of political institutions.

Territorial marketing (also called place or regional marketing) refers to activities and strategies aimed at promoting a specific territory. Andrzej Szromnik, in his book “Territorial Marketing” [2], defines it as a way of managing a territorial unit (region, city) aimed at creating a positive image of the place for a wide range of recipients, both residents and outsiders such as investors or tourists. Territorial marketing includes various promotional activities intended to distinguish a given place from other competing areas and increase its attractiveness. Territorial marketing is a key tool in building place identity, attracting investment, increasing tourism traffic, and improving the overall image of the place. In the era of globalization and growing competition between different places around the world, territorial marketing has become an indispensable tool for local and regional authorities. Effective territorial marketing can contribute to infrastructure development, job creation, raising living standards, and increasing tourism revenues.

1.1. Objective, Methodology and Scope of Research

Today, both cities and metropolises, as particularly complex settlement structures, require innovative methods: identifying and demonstrating their metropolitan and urban potential, promotion, and education about their structure and functioning. In this context, the thesis adopted in this study is that one of the tools that can be used for this purpose is games related to urban planning. Thus, metropolitan and urban games can be part of territorial marketing.

Our aim is to construct a comparative typology of urban/metropolitan games and map application areas (e.g., education, territorial marketing) consistent with observed design dimensions. This typology should help to assess the broad applicability of games in the urban and planning context and the effectiveness of games as tools used in territorial marketing and to educate about city structures. These elements remain directions for future work.

The research methodology primarily included comparative analysis of selected games (including Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis, GZM—Górnośląsko-Zagłębiowska Metropolia/the Upper Silesian-Zagłębie Metropolis) concerning the issues of cities and metropolises. We conducted a comparative analysis of games-including Metropoli: Game in the GZM Metropolis (Upper Silesian–Zagłębie Metropolis, GZM)-informed by strategic documents and domain literature. The initial corpus was assembled through manual searches of open-access sources (keywords on games, implementation descriptions, creators/publishers, player communities), websites of local authorities, and academic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, CEJSH). Complementary exploratory desk research and scoping interviews (gameplay videos, player accounts, specialist reviews, and-where available-academic coverage) yielded ~90 candidate titles.

Because information depth varied by title and the coding framework was still being refined, we applied flexible screening rules aimed at data quality and design-space coverage, without prespecifying a fixed parameter set. We prioritized design diversity over representativeness: titles only tangentially connected to urban themes were deliberately retained to mark a lower boundary (“basic games”), while high-fidelity implementational simulations defined an upper boundary. The focal interest lies in mid-spectrum titles that combine educational aims with engaging play and mixed media. We then narrowed the corpus to N = 42 using the following criteria:

• Diversity in format and purpose (analog/digital/mixed media; educational, promotional, recreational);
• Documentation completeness sufficient for consistent descriptive coding and comparative analysis of core design attributes (mechanics, target, medium, context of use);
• Broad linkage to the urban/metropolitan context, ranging from primary focus to secondary/tangential connections (e.g., metropolitan motifs, place-based narratives);
• Production maturity spanning research prototypes to commercial releases, provided the project was transparently documented.

During analysis of all 42 games in the study, definitions of seven evaluation parameters (dimensions) were determined by experts, coding each parameter using descriptor codes on an ordinal, non-evaluative 1–5 scale (

Table 1. Game evaluation parameters and their descriptors (coded 1–5) Note: These descriptors are not evaluative-numbers do not indicate quality, but rather a different type of complexity.

Descriptor Codes:	Descriptors:
Parameter: Type of Gameplay
1	Memory/associative card game (e.g., pairs, matching)
2	Trivia/local or general knowledge quiz
3	Quest/urban outdoor game, interactive path, puzzle solving
4	Decision-making simulation (tycoon/city builder), abstract management
5	Urban design/spatial planning, scenario prototyping
Parameter: Project Character
1	Entertainment product (commercial, without educational functions)
2	Tourist/souvenir game (often simple format, low interaction)
3	Public education/local promotion
4	Tool for institutions/NGOs—civic education, consultation scenarios
5	Expert tool—policy testing, support for urban planning decisions
Parameter: Place-Based Relevance
1	Entirely abstract/universal
2	Typical city/generic urban space
3	Inspired by a real place, but fictional/stylized
4	Specifically named city, simplified representation
5	Real place with actual spatial data (maps, GIS data)
Parameter: Platform/Medium
1	Analog printed format (quiz, cards, brochure)
2	Board/physical card or board game
3	Urban game, supporting app, hybrid field activities
4	Digital game (desktop, mobile)
5	Advanced technology (AR, VR, GIS, simulation platforms)
Parameter: Degree of Specialization/Professionalization
1	Purely entertainment/tourist game
2	Game with local knowledge, thematic quizzes
3	Education for residents, students (e.g., schools, libraries)
4	Specialist education/expert tool
5	Real impact on space, political decisions, urban implementations
Parameter: Type of Publisher/Implementing Institution
1	Commercial entity (company, publisher)
2	Local organization/NGO
3	Public–private/hybrid partnership
4	Public institution (city, office, cultural institution)
5	University/research institution (scientific project)
Parameter: Promotional Function (Place/City Promotion)
1	Game not related to a specific place and without promotional function
2	Incidental or loose references to a place
3	Place present, but not the main theme (educational or historical game)
4	Place promotion as a secondary goal (e.g., for residents, tourists)
5	Place promotion as the main goal—strategic promotional tool

and

Table 2. Matrix of 7 parameters characterizing the 42 analyzed games. See Table 1 for descriptor definitions (codes 1–5).

Position	ID in Supplementary Materials Table S1	Title	Type of Gameplay	Project Character	Place-Based Relevance	Plat-Form /Medium	Professionalization	Type of Publisher	Promotional Function
1.	LIL	Lille Culture Quiz	2	3	4	4	3	5	5
2.	HOM	Hömma!	2	2	4	1	2	1	4
3.	GG	Gesucht & Gefunden im Ruhrpott	1	2	4	1	1	1	5
4.	WHG	Wer hätte das gedacht? Ruhrpott Quiz	2	2	4	1	2	1	5
5.	RPQ	Ruhrpott-Quiz (Neuauflage)	2	2	4	1	2	1	5
6.	MON	Monopoly—City Editions	4	2	4	2	1	1	5
7.	LDX	LandXcape—Das Erbe des Stahlbarons	3	1	4	1	2	1	4
8.	CRC	Kraków 1325 AD	4	1	4	2	1	1	2
9.	RIG	Riga—The Game—Merchants of the Baltic Sea	4	1	4	2	1	1	2
10.	FIS	Szlak Rybek	3	3	5	3	1	4	5
11.	H-T	TamTu	3	3	5	3	1	4	5
12.	DEC	Odkoduj Miasto	3	3	5	3	1	1	4
13.	PTE	Przemyśl dla odkrywców	3	3	5	3	1	4	5
14.	SMC	Solve the mystery and explore hidden Kraków	3	3	5	3	1	1	4
15.	FOM	Foundations of Metropolis	4	1	2	2	1	1	1
16.	PKC	Pocket City 2	4	1	2	4	1	1	1
17.	MET	Metropolis—The Ultimate City Simulator	4	1	2	4	1	1	1
18.	TYC	Tycoon City: New York	4	1	5	4	1	1	1
19.	CSK	Cities: Skylines II	4	1	3	4	1	1	1
20.	SC3	SimCity 3000 Unlimited	4	1	3	4	1	1	1
21.	REL	Relasticity—Urban Resilience Game	5	4	2	2	4	5	1
22.	EQC	EquiCity	5	5	3	4	4	5	1
23.	CHI	Chill City	5	5	3	4	4	5	1
24.	APG	Adaptive Planning Game	5	5	3	4	4	5	1
25.	CHS	City Hall	4	4	2	4	4	5	1
26.	B3M	B3—Design Marketplace!	5	4	5	4	5	5	4
27.	CAV	Campus Visie/2040	5	4	5	2	4	5	4
28.	BGA	Buikslotermeerplein Game	5	4	5	3	5	4	4
29.	PCH	Participatory Chinatown	4	4	5	4	3	4	4
30.	BBB	Block by Block	4	5	5	4	3	3	3
31.	FPL	Finding Places—Tangible Interface	3	4	5	5	5	5	3
32.	PLO	Play Oosterwold	4	4	5	2	5	4	3
33.	SCT	SmartCulTour	4	4	5	4	3	5	4
34.	IIM	If I Were Istanbul’s Mayor	4	4	5	2	3	4	3
35.	GZM	Metropoli—Gra w Metropolię (GZM)	4	3	4	2	3	5	5
36.	DTH	Destination The Hague	4	4	5	2	3	4	4
37.	CIS	CityScope	5	5	5	5	3	5	3
38.	CAM	A Circular Amsterdam	4	4	5	2	3	4	3
39.	MTP	Metropoly	4	5	5	5	5	3	3
40.	PTC	Rozegraj Miasto 2.0	1	4	4	2	3	5	5
41.	CVR	Cities: VR	4	1	2	5	1	1	1
42.	URR	UrbanRama	4	5	5	5	4	5	1

), and then creating a typology of urban and metropolitan games using radar plots. Expert inspection of the radar plots suggested five coherent clusters, which we treated as a working hypothesis to be statistically verified. In relation to the set of 42 games, an interpretative method was applied to them, using comparative analysis techniques. Additionally, quantitative and qualitative research methods were used, employing counting techniques as well as analyzing and sorting collected data. Details of the statistical procedures are described in Section 1.2, while the corresponding results are presented in Section 3. For statistical analyses and analyses of variance (ANOVA), Excel 2019 was used along with the advanced data analysis and statistical modeling software Statistica 13.3 PL, from the Silesian University of Technology. The results of these analyses were ultimately graphically processed using CorelDraw 2024 software to enhance clarity. Figure 1 provides an overview of the research workflow.

The time scope of the research was limited to games created after the year 2000, i.e., in the 21st century. Although urban and social games are often associated with younger populations due to their digital and interactive nature, the scope of this research intentionally encompasses a broader age spectrum. The selected games-especially those used in territorial marketing and urban education-are designed to engage diverse user groups, including students, young professionals, educators, local government representatives, and adult residents interested in urban development. This inclusive approach reflects the growing accessibility of game-based tools and the increasing digital literacy across age groups. Moreover, many of the analyzed games, particularly serious games and XR (Extended Reality) based applications, are tailored for participatory urban planning processes, which typically involve adult stakeholders. Therefore, the intended audience for this research includes both younger users (e.g., university students) and older participants actively involved in civic and planning activities. This choice is supported by the nature of the games studied, which often require critical thinking, spatial awareness, and decision-making skills-competencies not limited to youth.

The result of these activities was comparative analyses followed by a typology of games. A significant role in the research was also played by the case study method, which was used when discussing selected examples of games. The database built in this way enabled further analyses and the development of final conclusions.

It is important to add that three students were involved in the research project from January 2024 to February 2025. Their contribution to the article consisted primarily of developing case studies of four selected games, as well as taking part in preparing a preliminary draft of the article. It is also worth noting that these students had previously participated in the invention and preparation of the patent for one of the games described, Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis.

1.2. Statistical Methods Used in the Analysis

The article applies a coherent set of methods selected to reduce multicollinearity, empirically verify the typology, and ensure coding reliability. To mitigate bias, the coding and statistical analyses were conducted by authors who did not co-invent Metropoli game.

As a primary step, Spearman’s rank correlations (ρ) were estimated among seven ordinal parameters for N = 42 games, given the method’s robustness to outliers and departures from normality. The correlation matrix is reported in

Table 3. Spearman’s rank correlations (ρ) among seven coded game parameters (N = 42). Upper triangle shows Spearman ρ; lower triangle shows p-values. Values in bold red are significant at α = 0.05.

ρ p	Type of Gameplay	Project Character	Place-Based Relevance	Platform/ Medium	Professionalization		Promotional Function
Type of gameplay		0.41	−0.08	0.43	0.45	0.39	−0.59
Project character	0.006		0.4	0.32	0.81	0.76	0
Place-based relevance	0.57	0.006		0.006	0.23	0.19	0.45
Platform/medium	0.004	0.03	0.96		0.17	0.24	−0.49
Professionalization	0.002	0	0.12	0.28		0.74	−0.09
Type of publisher	0.01	0	0.22	0.11	0		0.05
Promotional function	0	0.89	0	0	0.56	0.71

Values highlighted in red and bold are statistically significant at p < 0.05.

. To flag potential multicollinearity, a threshold of |ρ| ≥ 0.70 was used; based on this, predictor weights were calibrated, down-weighting highly intercorrelated features and up-weighting relatively independent ones. The resulting weights are listed in

Table 4. Assigned parameter weights (ref. = 1.0) used for the weighted analyses.

Parameter	Assigned Weight
Place-based relevance	1.3
Platform/medium	1.2
Type of gameplay	1.0
Promotional function	1.0
Project character	0.7
Professionalization	0.7
Type of publisher	0.7

. In line with our a priori design rule, we did not estimate an unweighted solution because strong dependencies would over-represent correlated constructs. Next, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tested whether, after applying these weights, mean parameter values differed significantly across the predefined groups. The ANOVA results and effect sizes (η²) are summarized in

Table 5. Results of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for seven parameters of urban games (N = 42, k = 5 clusters) and an interpretation of how each parameter differentiates clusters.

Parameter	Sum of Squares Between Clusters (SS Effect)	Sum of Squares Within Clusters (SS Error)	Effect Size (η2)	Substantive Interpretation
Project character	37.87	4.22	0.90	Separates clusters most strongly; 90% of the variance explained.
Professionalization	34.04	8.30	0.80	It is growing rapidly from basic to implementation games.
Promotional function	82.48	21.42	0.79	It clearly separates promotional games from expert simulations.
Type of publisher	47.39	16.26	0.74	The profile of the institution largely coincides with the function of the game.
Place-based relevance	56.82	25.62	0.69	It divides field/implementation games (high) from digital city builders (low).
Type of gameplay	19.64	25.33	0.44	It differentiates simple quizzes from complex simulations, but less so than the above features.
Platform/medium	36.54	52.74	0.41	Shows the transition from analog to digital/AR content, but partially overlaps with Type of gameplay.

The table presents the sum of squares between clusters (SS Effect) and within clusters (SS Error), the effect size coefficient η², and a synthetic interpretative conclusion for each parameter.

. We reported effect sizes (η²) and 95% confidence intervals, and conducted multiple comparisons using Tukey’s HSD at α = 0.05. Coding consistency was verified via independent ratings: parameter coding (descriptor assignment) by two raters reached 100% agreement (Cohen’s κ was not applicable due to zero variance across raters), whereas a separate three-expert minimum-age classification yielded κ = 0.98. Additionally, the typology was cross-checked with k-means clustering (k = 5) and evaluated using the silhouette coefficient, providing empirical support for the identified clusters. Corresponding results are presented in Section 3.

Methodological Decisions and Their Implications

The steps above were designed to have direct consequences for the results. Weight adjustments made in response to observed collinearity among some variables were expected to increase separation between the identified classes and to facilitate interpretation of differences between them, without changing the overall hierarchy of effects. The chosen number of clusters was justified by both substantive considerations and clustering-quality indices, which guided how the roles of the respective case types were interpreted. The sampling criteria-focused on coherence and recency of the material-were intended to strengthen within-cluster homogeneity, although they limit the scope of generalization beyond the defined context. Taken together, these decisions shape the resulting typology in a manner consistent with the study’s aims.

1.3. State of Research

1.3.1. Urban Games—Literature Review

Urban games, as an innovative educational tool, are gaining popularity in social, educational, and even spatial contexts. In academic literature, urban games are analyzed in terms of their educational, integrative, touristic, and participatory potential, and as a tool for city promotion. The conducted literature review related to these issues aimed to examine the most important findings to date regarding educational urban games, link them together, and present common areas that can be used in further research.

On the topic of urban games in the context of tourism, Warcholik and Leja [3] wrote, among others. In their study, the authors show that urban games are an innovative form of exploring urban space, combining elements of fun, education, and tourism promotion. Moreover, the growing popularity of urban games indicates their potential as attractive tourism products. Urban games can contribute to increasing the engagement of tourists and residents in discovering local attractions and history.

Meanwhile, Poplin [4] as well as Gordon and Koo [5] highlight the significant potential of urban games as educational tools that engage participants in active knowledge acquisition. Urban games support social integration, building a sense of community and belonging among participants. They foster the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Educational urban games can be organized by various public institutions such as schools, libraries, theaters, and museums. Christ and Szmigiel [6] also point out that urban games are an effective tool for social activation, promoting cooperation and communication among participants. Urban games can build trust and strengthen interpersonal relationships, which fosters social integration. They can be used as educational tools, conveying knowledge about local culture and traditions.

Beckett and Shaffer [7] wrote about urban games in the spatial context, emphasizing that urban games have significant educational potential in teaching participants/players about urban layouts and the functions of urban spaces. Urban games can support social participation, democratization of decisions of public importance, promote civic activity, and engage residents in decision-making processes concerning public spaces. Moreover, urban games that use mobile technologies can enhance the attractiveness of a city, particularly for young people.

In summary, the review of literature on educational urban games indicates their broad potential in various social and educational contexts. Urban games can serve as tools for education, integration, tourism, and city promotion. They can be part of contemporary, innovative territorial marketing. Furthermore, they support the development of critical thinking skills, social activation, public space management, social participation, and sustainable urban development. The common areas that link these findings include interactivity, participant engagement, spatial education, and the promotion of local culture and traditions.

1.3.2. Game-Based Learning, Serious Games—Definition and Literature Review

The educational dimension of games has been extensively described in publications related to the English term game-based learning (GBL), an educational method that uses games to support the teaching and learning process. The definition of GBL includes both digital and analog games used in various educational contexts, from preschool to adult education. Research conducted by Plass, Homer, and Kinzer [8] indicates that GBL combines cognitive, motivational, affective, and sociocultural elements to create an engaging educational environment. Whitton [9] emphasizes that GBL can encompass various types of games, including those based on competition, challenges, exploration, fantasy, goals, interaction, outcomes, people, rules, and safety. Teaching and decision making on the basis of game mechanics are extensively analyzed by Sawyer B. and Rejeski D. [10] in their report, which introduced the term serious games into academic discourse. The authors demonstrate how games and simulations can support decision-making processes in public administration, citing several early examples of applications (military, health, civic education). Mayer [11], one of the creators of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, in a monograph synthesizing the results of over 550 studies on the educational effectiveness of digital games, proposes the ICAP model (Interactive, Collaborative, Adaptive, Participatory) and a set of promising design principles (Modality, Personalization, Pretraining, Coaching, Self-Explanation) for learning-oriented games, and also evaluates methods for measuring outcomes.

Adipat [12], in turn, points out that GBL is an effective tool for language teaching (English), especially for learners of English as a second or foreign language. Kgosietsile and Okike [13], in their study, state that the game-based learning method can increase motivation, engagement, and problem-solving skills among students. In the context of urban planning and spatial development, Mazur-Belzyt [14] emphasizes that urban games can be an effective educational tool that engages participants in actively acquiring knowledge about urban structure and planning processes. Whitton [9] adds that GBL can include various types of games, including those based on competition, challenges, exploration, and interaction, making them an attractive educational tool. Hainey and colleagues [15] conducted a systematic literature review that showed GBL can improve educational outcomes in mathematics, science, language, and social studies, suggesting that similar benefits may be achieved in urban education. The conclusions from the literature indicate that game-based learning has the potential to significantly impact the educational process in the field of urban planning and spatial development.

1.3.3. Serious Games and XR Hybrid Games (VR/AR—Virtual Reality/Augmented Reality) in Urban Planning

Serious games are games whose primary purpose is not pure entertainment, but the achievement of specific, non-leisure goals such as education, behavior change, training, health promotion, communication, or solving particular problems. They are designed to combine elements of play with important messages, simulations, and educational objectives. A meta-analysis on serious games in the context of sustainability is offered by Akbarieh, Han, and Klippel [16]. This meta-analysis covers a very broad range of objects that use game mechanics as part of their functionality (gamification), and not necessarily games per se. For the entire corpus of 133 objects/games related to sustainability, the authors identify three overarching categories applicable in the broader context of gamification interventions: Pedagogical, Persuasive, and Participatory (3P Model).

The broadly understood urban planning theme (including smart buildings, smart communities, and smart cities) constitutes the second-largest group in this meta-analysis-37 cases. It concerns games and gamification systems that support planning processes: from the redevelopment of post-industrial areas, through the optimization of building density and functions, to public consultations on local development plans. The largest share consists of participatory mobile applications with geolocation and games using virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), which means their primary purpose is to engage stakeholders in the creation or evaluation of urban planning scenarios.

The educational role is also strongly emphasized: at least half of the 133 titles serve to teach the basics of planning, and nearly all use an educational component to prepare players for informed co-decision-making. This confirms the potential of games as tools for “education through participation” in spatial development processes.

Some of the games presented demonstrate the practical application of scientific research results in planning. For example, Metropolis (see Supplementary Material Table S1 ID: MET) shows how important a complex transport system is in a metropolis. Some of the connections on the game boards show that some of them (infinite) could still improve transport in the region. In addition, the game strategy clearly emphasizes the character of individual municipalities. If we want to create a game based on a sustainable, green metropolis, this can be achieved by selecting location cards with such qualities. Similarly, in metropolitan-level spatial planning, it is necessary to create strategies that reward places with a high level of forest cover, with more parks, water reservoirs, etc. Thus, the game has numerous analogies that demonstrate areas of possible action.

Recent studies show that combining a physical model or board with an AR overlay can support urban participation on a broader scale. For example, CityScope by Noyman A. [17] (Supplementary Material Table S1 ID: CIS) operates with a modular Lego block model and an AR overlay (in the form of projections) to visualize specialist data (building density, traffic, emissions) for users. The Holding Pattern project [18] uses an AR application for the revitalization of vacant properties; players take on roles such as developers, NGOs (Non-Government Organization), and city representatives, and negotiate. Similarly, applications with a strong AR component like City Craft [19] allow users to collaboratively select, scale, and move three-dimensional objects (benches, trees, small architecture) directly in situ, by looking at a tablet or phone screen. These tools enhance creativity (generating more variants) and increase the sense of agency. In general, creators of AR-based games declare improved understanding of the analyzed processes thanks to this component [19]. These examples indicate that moderate, contextual XR immersion (combining VR/AR and MR—Mixed Reality) can support the Participation goals of the 3P model at the district level, without falling into the “cognitive overload” criticized by Mayer [11].

1.4. Research Gap

Despite the growing body of literature on games in spatial planning and sustainable urban development, research focuses almost exclusively on “serious games,” and in terms of medium-on digital games (VR/AR, mobile applications) or isolated cases of analog participatory games [16]. There is a lack of a comprehensive, comparative approach to analog board and card games, as well as hybrid games designed to communicate metropolitan narratives and support territorial marketing. There is also no typology based on multidimensional coding, nor a database that would enable quantitative analyses of such media. This article, by presenting an integrated analysis of 42 titles and identifying five functional clusters, partially fills this gap and creates a reference point for further research on analog tools for territorial marketing and urban education for various users.

2. Case Study of Selected Games

2.1. Criteria for Selecting Game Examples

To ensure methodological consistency and the relevance of the analyzed cases to the research objectives, the selection of urban and metropolitan games included in this study was based on a set of precisely defined criteria. The primary function of the game was considered to be educational-most useful both in territorial marketing and in “urban literacy.” This includes three subfunctions: Knowledge acquisition (transmitting facts and concepts), Facilitating (enhancing understanding through visualization or simulation), and Signaling (confirming acquired competence, e.g., through game scores) [16]. This function does not extend into attitude or behavior change (the domain of persuasive techniques) nor co-decision-making (participation), but focuses on learning and developing participants’ knowledge. These selection rules shape the observed spread on key dimensions (e.g., Place-Based Relevance and Project Character) that later drive between-cluster differences reported in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5.

A key reference point for the game selection in the review was Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis [20], best known to the authors in terms of structure, theme, and educational-promotional functions. Games were sought that show significant similarity to this model, both in terms of urban planning topics addressed and the way participants are engaged in reflecting on contemporary challenges of urban and metropolitan development. Other important criteria included: the usefulness of a given game in the context of spatial education, promoting knowledge about urban space and planning processes, as well as knowledge of local values and support for participatory processes and planning decisions. Another criterion was the game’s grounding in the context of contemporary cities, reflecting current socio-economic-spatial issues and urban processes, which ensured relevance to real problems and challenges of urban and metropolitan development. The use of gamification mechanisms to increase social engagement and spatial awareness of participants was also important. As a result of these criteria, the focus was placed on games that not only serve entertainment purposes but also act as tools supporting sustainable urban and metropolitan development. The location of the game was not used as a selection criterion. The analyzed game examples concern cities and metropolises in countries such as France, Germany, Poland, Latvia, Sweden, the USA, Canada, the Netherlands, Turkey and Chile. It is not possible to present all 42 games examined during the study in this article. Descriptions of these games, along with key information about their mechanics, purpose and target audience, are provided in tabular form in the Supplementary Materials (Table S1). They also contain links to source materials (such as manufacturers’ websites) and graphics showing the interfaces of these games. In this article, 4 examples from the set of 42 analyzed games related to cities and/or metropolitan areas are presented. These are: Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis [20], Metropoly—A Decision-Making Game for Three Dutch Metropolises, Metropolis—The Ultimate City Simulator [21] and Foundations of Metropolis [22]. These four cases are illustrative and were not used to determine the statistical groupings; rather, they help interpret the patterns observed in the full 42-game dataset. The games discussed in this article are illustrative case studies drawn from the full set of 42 titles we analyzed. They span different formats and user engagements to reflect the diversity captured by our typology. All games were evaluated using the same methodology. For brevity, detailed descriptions of every title are provided in Table S1 (Supplementary Material). The case studies were selected for their direct links to metropolitan contexts, emphasis on educational objectives, and diversity of gameplay mechanics.

2.2. Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis

Metropoli is a board game developed in 2024 by students of the Faculty of Architecture at the Silesian University of Technology within the URBANMODEL scientific club, under the supervision of Tomasz Bradecki.

Metropoli combines a card game with a board game and serves an educational purpose about the Upper Silesian-Zagłębie Metropolis (GZM—Górnośląsko-Zagłębiowska Metropolia). The game cards contain information about the 41 municipalities forming the GZM Metropolis. The numerical data on the cards include the area of each municipality, its population, green space area, length of bicycle routes, percentage of surface waters, and its ranking among municipalities. Additionally, the card edges feature the total number of urban parks, transfer centers, national roads, cultural facilities, bus lines, nature protection sites, historical monuments, and railway stations present in each municipality [20,23].

The cards combined with the board game create gameplay in which each participant can assume the role of an owner of specific municipalities and manage their development, creating their own Metropolis. The gameplay involves moving around the board, purchasing plots, and managing the municipality cards in possession (Figure 2). At the beginning of the game, 20 cards are randomly placed on the board, and the remaining ones are distributed among the players. Each player receives an initial capital in Metro-coins, which allows them to purchase municipalities and develop their own metropolis. During their turn, a player rolls the dice, moves their token, and makes decisions-they may purchase a card, exchange cards in their possession, or pay a fee for stopping on a plot owned by another player. The board also includes special fields that introduce additional mechanics into the game. On Quiz fields, players scan a QR code and answer questions, gaining extra coins or losing a turn. Fields with railway tracks force the player to pause, while special connections allow fast travel between selected municipalities, provided they are owned by the same participant. The game ends when the last card on the board is revealed. Participants then summarize their results by calculating the urban coefficient using the formula: the sum of parks and green monuments divided by the area of the managed metropolis. The player with the highest score wins. In the case of a tie, the deciding factor is the accumulated funds. The board game also pays particular attention to the road communication system within the GZM area, which players use to move around the board. This system is a particularly important aspect of the gameplay, as it constitutes an integral part of the entire Metropolis, demonstrating the ease of communication between municipalities [24]. To enrich the board game, students also developed 3D models of characteristic places in each municipality, which were 3D printed and serve as game tokens.

Metropoli is a strategic game that engages players and increases their awareness of urban space management. Thanks to realistic data and mechanics inspired by actual urban planning, it serves as both an educational tool and entertainment in the field of planning and strategy.

The Metropoli game has received funding for a project that implements innovative teaching through gaming in secondary schools in the region. After each workshop, a survey is conducted among the participants. According to the data collected so far (approx. 80 surveys), the game is rated as good or very good and is perceived as a tool for disseminating knowledge about the metropolis. Teachers in schools receive the game and conduct subsequent games on their own. The game achieves its goals of popularizing knowledge about the metropolis: in many cases, the quizzes that accompany the game (QR code and link to questions) draw attention in a fun way to many aspects related not only to geographical knowledge, but also to culture and local tradition (e.g., questions about dialect, former historical names of cities). During numerous trials, it was noticed that participants are determined to win and attempt to strategically invest in selected locations (cards). This illustrates their awareness of the potential of selected places. It was also found that the pawns and cards are very memorable, thanks to the identification of the shapes of the pawns through 3D printing and their constant movement.

2.3. Metropoly—A Decision-Making Game for Three Dutch Metropolises

The game Metropoly is a simulation-based decision-making tool developed in 2017 by Jaap Modder, Jeroen Saris, and Wouter Veldhuis, designed to support spatial planning in three major metropolitan regions of The Netherlands: Amsterdam–Utrecht, Rotterdam–The Hague, and Eindhoven [21]. Set in a real territorial context, the game assumes the functioning of these areas as an integrated decision-making system, allowing participants-acting as regional decision-makers-to make choices on the basis of five realistic investment scenarios. These scenarios include projects in infrastructure, innovation, environmental protection, and social development, and the decisions made affect key development indicators such as quality of life, investment attractiveness, and regional cohesion. The game was available in both digital and analog formats and was used in workshop and consultation practices involving stakeholders from the public and private sectors (Figure 3). Although it was a one-time initiative and is no longer active, it serves as an example of a research-educational game that combines gamification elements with real planning processes, supporting the development of strategic competencies and interregional cooperation in the context of sustainable metropolitan development.

2.4. Metropolis—The Ultimate City Simulator

The game Metropolis is a commercial strategic simulation of the “city builder” type, developed and released in 2023 by the independent development studio Studio by the Bay [25]. The product is available on the Steam platform [26] and remains active in digital distribution. Although the game was not created for educational purposes nor is it affiliated with research institutions, its structure and decision-making mechanisms make it a potentially useful illustrative tool in urban planning education.

The game is set in a fictional city whose space the player shapes from scratch. The absence of references to specific geographic locations allows for a universal approach to planning issues. The player assumes the role of a newly elected mayor tasked with rebuilding a degraded urban area following the failed term of the previous administration. The overarching goal is to transform the city into the “most livable” urban environment.

The game mechanics encompass a wide range of urban management activities: from spatial planning, through the development of transport and housing infrastructure, to budget control, tax policy, and interactions with the real estate market. The game also implements elements simulating social and political processes, such as local elections, public opinion, crime, unemployment, and land value fluctuations. The player makes decisions that directly affect the development of the city and its inhabitants, as well as the duration of their own term in office.

Metropolis requires the user to adopt a holistic approach to urban management, combining spatial, economic, and social aspects. The game interface provides feedback in the form of reports, resident complaints, and media inquiries, which enhances immersion and reflects the complexity of real decision-making processes in urban governance. As such, the game can be used as a tool to support understanding of urban development dynamics, even though its primary purpose remains entertainment.

2.5. Foundations of Metropolis

Foundations of Metropolis is a commercial strategic board game released in 2024 by Emerson Matsuuchi and published by Arcane Wonders [27]. The game is a mechanical and thematic extension of the earlier title Foundations of Rome by Emerson Matsuuchi. Although its main purpose is entertainment, the structure of gameplay and the mechanisms used make it a potentially useful educational tool in the context of basic instruction in urban planning and spatial development.

The game takes place in a fictional, abstract city inspired by classical visions of metropolises from the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, resembling developing urban centers in Europe and North America. Players assume the roles of urban planners and developers tasked with strategically placing buildings within a dynamically evolving urban structure. The game board, shared by all participants, represents a grid of plots on which players can construct buildings of various purposes and functions.

The game mechanics are based on three main pillars: plot acquisition, building construction, and income management. Each player has their own investment board containing information about the potential revenue, population, and prestige of individual buildings (Figure 4). The gameplay is divided into three rounds, corresponding to successive stages of city development. In each round, players make decisions regarding the purchase of property deeds, construction, or income collection, which affects their investment capabilities in subsequent stages.

Scoring in the game is based on three parameters: population, income, and prestige. A particularly interesting aspect is the prestige point mechanism, awarded for placing public buildings adjacent to opponents’ structures, which reflects the importance of functional synergy and spatial planning in the urban context. The player who accumulates the most prestige points at the end of the game is awarded the title of Grand Architect.

Foundations of Metropolis can be used as a tool to support the teaching of basic urban planning principles, such as space optimization, functional planning, neighborhood interactions, and the consequences of investment decisions. Although the game does not refer to a specific city or real spatial data, its abstract form allows for modeling and analysis of urban processes in a simplified yet engaging environment [27,28].

3. Comparative Analysis of Urban and Metropolis Games

3.1. Criteria and Methodology for Analyzing Urban Games

3.1.1. Sample Selection

A total of 42 games were selected for analysis, with cities and metropolises as their central theme-understood both as physical spaces and complex social, economic, and institutional systems. The aim was to identify a set of features useful for educating the public about the functioning of cities based on specific urban areas and as a means of promoting those areas. It was therefore essential to include the broadest possible spectrum of available games currently functioning in commercial, educational, promotional, and research contexts, to analyze their characteristics, identify limitations and advantages, and determine potential target audiences.

The primary inclusion criteria were:

• The game’s theme directly related to metropolises, cities, or districts, preferably linked to real cities;
• Availability of materials about the game that are not promotional in nature, access to the game itself for testing or access to other informative materials (scientific articles, screenshots, videos from gameplay);
• Transparency of data regarding the publisher, game objectives, and mechanics.

The broad scope of criteria included in the analysis was intentionally adopted to capture diverse types of games and their potential applications. It was assumed that the usefulness of individual parameters may only become apparent at a later stage of the study [11,29].

3.1.2. Coding Method and Value Assignment

The dimensions of the analysis were not adopted a priori but emerged during the study as a response to the need to organize the diverse characteristics identified in the examined set of games. They were formulated gradually, on the basis of the analysis of documentation, materials, and functions of individual games, as a set of parameters enabling their systematic characterization. The selection aimed to capture key differences and similarities between games with varying purposes, structures, and institutional contexts, ultimately identifying clusters of games with similar characteristics. Coding was based on the analysis of game documentation (instructions, publisher websites, educational materials, reviews), the possibility of testing some of the games, and expert interviews.

Each game was characterized across seven parameters (dimensions), with five descriptors in each parameter (coded 1–5). These descriptor codes are not evaluative-higher numbers do not indicate higher quality, but rather a different type of complexity or embeddedness [30].

• Type of gameplay/dominant mechanic
  This parameter defines the dominant form of player engagement, understood as the primary mode of action within the game structure;
• Project character
  This parameter concerns the intended function of the game and the assumed context of its application;
• Place-Based Relevance
  This parameter defines the extent to which the game is grounded in the realities of a specific city or its physical location;
• Platform/Medium
  This parameter describes the technical and spatial environment of player interaction with the game;
• Degree of Professionalization/Specialization/Implementation Use
  This parameter refers to the expected level of substantive and competency-based preparation of the game participant;
• Type of Publisher/Implementing Institution
  This parameter classifies games according to the institutional and organizational profile of the publisher, including its business model and mission;
• Promotional Function
  This parameter defines the extent to which the game serves a promotional function for a city, institution, or idea, understood as the deliberate inclusion of narrative, visual, or structural elements aimed at building the image, recognition, or acceptance of a given place or policy.

The descriptors for each parameter are presented in Table 1.

Data were coded independently by two authors (A1, A2). Each assigned values for the seven criteria to 42 game titles based on the instructions as in Table 1. In the first round, full agreement was recorded (percent agreement 100%). Due to the absence of discrepancies, Cohen’s κ statistic did not provide additional information and was not reported. In the event of potential disputes, a consensus mediation procedure was planned but was not required. The resulting matrix is presented in Table 2.

The recommended minimum participant age was also analyzed for all 42 games included in the dataset. For most games, this range falls between 8 and 16 years. Threshold values were determined on the basis of manufacturer declarations, official classification systems (e.g., PEGI—Pan European Game Information, ESRB—Entertainment Software Rating Board), and information available on distribution platforms (e.g., Steam). In cases where clear markings were absent, age was determined on the basis of expert analysis of game mechanics complexity and the anticipated context of use (e.g., consultation workshops, educational activities). Games were independently evaluated by three experts. The kappa coefficient was κ = 0.98.

The study is based on declared age categories and expert assessments of mechanic complexity. While this allows for preliminary conclusions regarding the suitability of the format for target groups, this relationship requires confirmation through empirical user research.

Due to the near-complete absence of content involving violence, sexuality, or other elements requiring protection of minors, the established age ranges do not serve a censoring function but rather indicate the expected level of cognitive and social competence of the player. It can therefore be assumed that a positive correlation exists: the complexity of the game increases with the recommended age of the participant. An exception is made for serious games used in professional analysis of real-world issues. In such cases, the lower age limit is estimated at 20–25 years and is associated with competencies acquired through higher education, professional practice, or specialized training [31,32].

3.2. Typology and Classification of Games

An expert query of 42 urban games enabled the identification of five typological clusters, allowing for in-depth comparative analysis. This section reports empirical results; methodological details are given in Section 1.2.

The criterion for division was the observable convergence of scores across the seven qualitative parameters listed above (reflected numerically), as well as an analysis of their functions in educational and simulation contexts. This classification, based on functional context (promotion, education, workshops) and knowledge of target audiences, maps onto real strategies. As a result, it accurately reflects design objectives and is therefore recommended as a typology for further analysis.

On the basis of this, the following clusters of urban games were distinguished (Figure 5). Cluster sizes are shown in Figure 6, and weighted parameter means with Tukey HSD interpretations are summarized in

Table 6. Weighted mean values of 7 parameters across 5 typological clusters of urban games (N = 42) and interpretation of post hoc Tukey tests (an Honestly Significant Difference) for unequal group sizes (p < 0.05).

No	Parameters	Basic Games	Urban Games	Commercial Simulations	Conceptual Simulations	Implementation Simulations	Comment
1	Type of gameplay	2.67	3.00	4.00	4.66	4.00	Games in Cluster 1 exhibit significantly simpler mechanics compared to advanced simulations in Clusters 3–5. The level of complexity is “moderate”; it differs significantly only from the most advanced Cluster 4. No significant differences were found between Clusters 3, 4, and 5, confirming a similar gameplay level among digital simulations.
2	Project character	1.24	2.10	0.70	3.26	2.89	The ‘basic games’ cluster (M = 2.7) differs significantly from the ‘commercial simulations’, ‘conceptual simulations’, and ‘implementation simulations’ clusters (p < 0.05). Additionally, a difference was found between ‘urban games’ (M = 3.0) and ‘conceptual simulations’ (M = 4.7). Other comparisons were not statistically significant, suggesting that games with higher mechanical complexity (values 4–5) form a relatively homogeneous group.
3	Place-based relevance	5.20	6.50	3.50	3.90	6.30	Two distinct groups of games are visible in terms of place-based connection: games with strong spatial grounding (Clusters 2 and 5, M≈6.5) and games with weak grounding (Clusters 3 and 4, M≈3.7). Differences between these blocks are highly significant (p < 0.001), confirming that the degree of use of real urban context is a key typological dimension. Cluster 1 (M = 5.2) occupies a transitional position, differing only partially from games with the lowest and highest levels of spatial embedding.
4	Platform/medium	2	3.6	4.6	4.6	3.6	Analysis of variance for the Platform/Medium parameter revealed significant differentiation among the five game clusters (F(4.37) = 6.41; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.41). The post hoc Tukey test shows that ‘basic games’ (mean = 2.0—analog format) differ statistically from all clusters using digital or hybrid media (commercial, conceptual, and implementation simulations). ‘Urban games’ (mean = 3.6) occupy a transitional position and do not differ significantly from either analog or digital games. This result confirms that the type of platform and technology is another important dimension separating simple promotional games from complex simulations.
5	Professionalization	1.16	0.7	0.7	2.8	2.6	Differences between clusters were particularly pronounced for Professionalization (F(4.37) = 37.95; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.80). The post hoc Tukey test shows that games in the ‘conceptual simulations’ and ‘implementation simulations’ clusters require significantly higher levels of competence than all other types. Urban games and commercial simulations occupy an intermediate position, while ‘basic games’ exhibit the lowest level of professionalization. This result aligns with the function of each game: from entertainment and promotion (Cluster 1) to expert and consultative tools (Cluster 5).
6	Type of publisher	1	1.96	0.7	3.38	3	Differences in the Type of Publisher were highly significant (F(4.37) = 26.96; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.74). The post hoc Tukey test shows that the ‘basic games’ cluster (M = 1.0) differs significantly from the ‘conceptual simulations’ and ‘implementation simulations’ clusters, which are dominated by public institutions and universities (M ≈ 3.3). This result confirms that the institutional profile of the publisher is a key differentiator between commercial products and research-consultative games.
7	Promotional function	4.1	4.6	1	1	3.6	The Promotional Function of the game strongly depends on the cluster type (F(4.37) = 35.62; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.79). The post hoc Tukey test shows that ‘basic games’ (M = 4.1) and ‘urban games’ (M = 4.6) significantly exceed all commercial and conceptual simulations (M = 1.0) in terms of promotional intensity. ‘Implementation simulations’ (M = 3.7) occupy an intermediate position: they do not differ from promotional games but clearly separate from market-driven and conceptual simulations (p < 0.001). This result confirms that the use of games for promoting a place or idea is a key criterion distinguishing the simplest products from complex consultative tools.

. The five clusters are:

• Basic Games—based on simple rules (e.g., memory, quiz), often commercial or promotional, with low complexity and high accessibility.
  Examples: Hömma! [33], Gesucht & Gefunden im Ruhrpott, Ruhrpott Quiz [34], Supplementary Materials (Table S1 ID: HOM, GG, RPQ);
• Urban Games (Outdoor and Interactive)—engaging physical space or mobile technologies, most often with a promotional-educational character.
  Examples: Odkoduj Miasto [35], TamTu [36] (see Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: DEC, H-T);
• Commercial Simulations—more complex digital or board games (e.g., city builders), enhancing understanding of urban systems, but designed for the gaming market.
  Examples: Cities: Skylines II [37], SimCity 3000 [38] (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: CSK, SC3);
• Conceptual Simulations—educational-research games designed in academic environments, often experimental, used for modeling social decision-making processes.
  Examples: EquiCity [39], Chill City [40] (see Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: EQC, CHI);
• Implementation Simulations—workshop and consultation games used as tools for public dialog, urban consultations, and prototyping.
  Examples: Rozegraj Miasto 2.0 [41], Participatory Chinatown [42], Finding Places (Hamburg) [43,44] (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID PTC, PCH, FPL).

On the basis of these clusters, the advantages and limitations of individual game formats in the context of urban education were analyzed. The focus was placed on the dichotomy between games that operate with physical elements (board, tokens, cards, etc.) and computer games, as both groups offer significantly different experiences for players.

The aforementioned games and their parameters were analyzed in terms of their usefulness for urban education, specifically for users who are not specialists in fields related to broadly understood urban planning. As a result of the analysis, a minimum player age of 15 years was adopted for this purpose, as it allows players to engage with more complex issues and game mechanics.

As illustrated by the histogram in Figure 6, the number of titles in each cluster ranges from 5 to 15, indicating that no category is dominant or marginal.

To minimize the risk of collinearity-i.e., excessive reinforcement of a single dimension and distortion of the similarity space-a Spearman rank correlation analysis was conducted for the seven examined parameters. Following the recommendations of Hair et al. [45], a threshold of |r| > 0.70 was adopted as a warning level. Table 3 (with statistically significant coefficients at p < 0.05 highlighted in red) reveals two distinct blocks of strongly correlated variables: (a) Project Character—Professionalization—Type of Publisher (r = 0.75–0.82), (b) Promotional Function—Type of Gameplay (r = –0.59).

The identification of these relationships formed the basis for further steps: variables within correlated clusters were assigned reduced weights (w = 0.7), while relatively independent parameters were strengthened (w = 1.2–1.3) (Table 4).

This calibrated set of predictors was then used in subsequent steps of analysis of variance (ANOVA) to define clusters within a more balanced, information-rich, and non-collinear parameter space. This indicates that the variation among games in the first block is largely interdependent, while the strong negative correlation between Promotional Function and Type of Gameplay suggests an inverse relationship: the simpler the mechanics, the stronger the marketing component. On the basis of these findings, weight adjustments were introduced: strongly correlated parameters were down-weighted (w = 0.7), and relatively autonomous parameters were up-weighted (w = 1.2–1.3). This allowed subsequent statistical analyses to be based on a balanced set of predictors, minimizing artifacts resulting from excessive collinearity. Consistent with Section 1.2, this weighting step improved between-cluster separation without altering the substantive ordering of effects.

From an expert perspective, it is necessary to assess the relevance of parameters contextually, for example, in AR games, the source of differentiation is the Medium, not the Publisher. Statistical analysis with equal weights does not capture this specificity.

To assess whether the identified clusters differ significantly in terms of each parameter (after weighting), a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied (Table 5). The ANOVA confirmed the validity of the five-cluster division. All F-tests were significant at p < 0.001, indicating that the mean values of each of the seven parameters differ statistically between clusters. The effect size values (η²) indicate the extent to which each parameters explains the variation across the dataset: Project Character proved to be the strongest predictor (η² = 0.90), accounting for 90% of the variance between groups. Slightly weaker effects were observed for two other variables: Place-Based Relevance (η² = 0.69) and Promotional Function (η² = 0.79). The former increases systematically from basic games to implementation simulations, while the latter clearly separates marketing-oriented games from expert simulations.

A significant, though somewhat weaker, effect is visible in the case of Type of Publisher (η² = 0.74); this result confirms the observation that the profile of the implementing institution largely corresponds to the function of the game itself. Moderate discriminative power was demonstrated by Type of Gameplay (η² = 0.44) and Form/Medium (η² = 0.41). These two parameters primarily differentiate the level of technical complexity-from analog quizzes to digital city builders and AR applications-but notably, their combined contribution to explaining variance remains significantly lower than that of content-related variables.

Overall, the ANOVA results indicate that the key factors segmenting urban games are a combination of substantive aspects (Project Character), the degree of grounding in real spatial context (Place-Based Relevance), and promotional objectives. Technological form and gameplay mechanics influence the structure of the division only secondarily. The established hierarchy of effects confirms that the proposed typology is not a mere reflection of technical solutions but rather captures deeper functional differences relevant to urban education and/or simulation of urban processes.

The expert typology was statistically confirmed across all analyzed dimensions (p < 0.001 for the F-test) (Table 6). The most distinguishing parameter among the classes was the Project Character: the mean value of 1.24 in “basic games” contrasts with 3.26 in conceptual simulations and 2.89 in implementation simulations (η² = 0.90). This indicates that the function of the game alone-from entertainment to expert tool-accounts for approximately 90% of the observed variance.

A similarly strong effect was observed for Place-Based Relevance (η² = 0.69). Outdoor and implementation games (M ≈ 6.5) strongly embed their narrative in real-world space, while commercial and conceptual simulations (M ≈ 3.7) tend to rely on abstract or fictional maps. The basic games cluster (M = 5.2) occupies an intermediate position, partially utilizing spatial context.

Promotional Function also clearly differentiates the clusters (η² = 0.79). High values in basic (M = 4.1) and urban games (M = 4.6) confirm the dominance of marketing-oriented messaging, whereas all commercial and conceptual simulations (M = 1.0) are nearly devoid of promotional intent. Implementation simulations fall in between (M = 3.7), combining promotional elements with a consultative component.

Type of Publisher (η² = 0.74) indicates that basic games are typically published by commercial entities (M = 1.0), while conceptual and implementation simulations are predominantly developed by universities and public institutions (M ≈ 3.3).

Technical and mechanical dimensions show a smaller, though still significant, discriminative power. Type of Gameplay (η² = 0.44) separates simple quizzes (M = 2.67) from complex simulations (M = 4.00–4.66), and Platform/Medium (η² = 0.41) reflects the transition from analog materials (M = 2.0) to digital media and AR (M ≈ 4.6).

Professionalization (η² = 0.80) confirms the intuitive assumption that basic games require the lowest level of player competence (M = 1.16), while the highest is demanded by conceptual and implementation simulations (M ≈ 2.8).

After applying the weights, an iterative K-means clustering (K = 5) was conducted. The resulting clusters ranged in size from 5 to 15 games (Figure 6) and yielded an average silhouette coefficient of 0.28, confirming the validity of the expert typology of five didactic-simulation roles.

3.3. Typologies of Urban Game Users

Three distinct user profiles emerge from the literature and analysis of empirical examples. This typology summarizes likely audiences based on literature and analyzed cases; it is not used to define or validate the five game clusters.

• Tourists: current and prospective visitors to the city
  The tourist users primarily seek adventure rooted in a specific location. Products such as Odkoduj Miasto (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID:DEC) meet this expectation by combining exploration with competition: “Players see the current team rankings, their score, and the time remaining” [35]. Small prizes, fast-paced gameplay, and a “here and now” narrative encourage photo sharing, while urban knowledge is present but delivered in a digestible puzzle format;
• Residents and other local stakeholders
  This group includes not only “average” inhabitants but also activists, officials, and planning professionals. Their motivation lies in understanding their surroundings and influencing the shape of their environment. The creators of the CityScope (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: CIS, FPL, PLO) platform emphasize that the tool “helps to build agency amongst the ‘have nots’, who traditionally were denied from the urban process” [46]. Games for these users must therefore offer high decision-making realism, cooperative mechanisms, and a clear translation of actions into quality-of-life indicators. Here, parameters patterns emphasize decision-making realism and educational aims, with comparatively lower promotional emphasis and a stronger link to local planning contexts;
• “Global” players—not tied to a specific location
  The third category consists mainly of users of city-builder games such as SimCity 3000 [38] and Cities: Skylines [37] (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: SC3, CSK). They are not connected to a particular location and treat virtual cities as a playground for creativity. As Wired notes, “‘Fixing’ cities is a key part of the appeal of Cities: Skylines– the game’s loyal community haunt Reddit and YouTube, offering and requesting aid and complaining about gridlock” [47]. These players are not direct targets of territorial marketing, education, or local participation, yet the mechanics developed in digital simulations become sources of solutions for educational and promotional products. Moreover, research on “videogame-induced tourism” shows that highly engaged digital game users may become actual tourists visiting places depicted in virtual worlds [48]. These users typically exhibit lower Place-Based Relevance but high engagement with mechanics that later inform educational and promotional titles.

These user profiles form a continuum. Understanding their motivations and habits is the first step toward designing games that not only inform and entertain but also effectively combine cognitive goals with city branding. While these audiences cut across clusters 1–5, their typical information needs align with the measured dimensions (e.g., Place-Based Relevance for tourists; decision-making realism for residents), which helps interpret how different game types may engage them.

3.4. Game Mechanics and Their Objectives

Analysis of the game corpus reveals that the first two groups-locals and tourists-typically receive different types of games (education vs. promotion) with distinct mechanics. The third group, although less relevant from a municipal policy perspective, enriches the toolkit available for urban education and territorial marketing.

3.4.1. Mechanics Oriented Toward Education on Urban Functioning

Games designed to transfer knowledge about how cities function are primarily based on three pillars: education about real-world interdependencies, decision-making simulations, and cooperative structures that require negotiation among actors. Participatory Chinatown (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: PCH) allows participants to assume fifteen roles of Boston residents and collaboratively seek solutions to gentrification. The CityScope platform uses physical LEGO blocks integrated with GIS (geographic information system) data to provide instant feedback on planning decisions, making it a fully fledged laboratory for urban education [46]. Analog simulations serve similar functions, such as Destination The Hague [49] (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: DTH), where players manage urban traffic on a map of the Hague, learning to balance accessibility and CO₂ emissions. Residents, activists, and officials expect games that enhance their agency in the planning process. As Noyman [46] states, CityScope “helps to build agency amongst the ‘have nots’, who traditionally were denied from the urban process.”

3.4.2. Mechanics Oriented Toward Territorial Marketing

Games promoting specific places emphasize the “sensory” embedding of the game in that location. In Odkoduj Miasto (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: DEC), QR codes placed throughout Warsaw, Gdynia, or Wrocław (Poland) unlock multimedia content, and an online leaderboard drives team competition [35]. The tourist quest Solve the Mystery and Explore Hidden Kraków (Poland) [50], (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: SMC) combines detective storytelling with culinary rewards, reinforcing the memorability of local micro-legends. The TamTu app (Łódź, Poland) also uses GPS triggers to reveal successive narrative scenes and directs pedestrian traffic to key tourist attractions [36] (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: H-T).

3.4.3. Cross-Over Mechanics

Beyond the previously discussed mechanics, cross-over or hybrid mechanics are also possible. These mechanics support both urban education and territorial marketing. Hybrid solutions build a bridge between learning and place promotion. TangibleAR in the Finding Places project (Hamburg) (see Supplementary Materials, Table S1 ID: FPL) engaged residents-designers and attracted media coverage of the “live urban planning table,” while simultaneously enhancing the city’s image [17]. The Block by Block (Supplementary Materials Table S1 ID: BBB) initiative transfers real neighborhoods of Nairobi and Medellín into Minecraft; local youth propose changes, while the global gaming community observes the process-local education meets international marketing [51]. A material pathway is proposed by Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis: each card presents real parameters of 41 municipalities, such as area, population, and degree of urbanization, along with QR codes linking to 3D models of selected spaces [52] (see Supplementary Materials, Table S1 ID: GZM). The reverse sides form a schematic of the metropolitan transport network [23]. Quiz fields on the board require scanning a code and answering a question about the region’s realities; a correct answer increases both the in-game budget and reputation. In this way, the economic competition mechanism is intertwined with knowledge transfer, and the game’s outcome is tied to the well-being of the entire metropolis, not the individual player’s account balance. In such games, not all mechanics need to support both domains, as long as they are well integrated and enhance gameplay attractiveness.

3.4.4. Perspective Switching—Tourist as Resident/Resident as Tourist

A key innovation is the procedure that allows a tourist to “feel” the weight of everyday decisions made by residents-and vice versa. In Participatory Chinatown, both groups draw roles as tenants or entrepreneurs, forcing them to view the neighborhood through the lens of rental costs rather than tourist attractions. Similarly, the mixed gameplay of Odkoduj Miasto encourages residents to cooperate with visitors-without guidance from a local partner, finding certain codes is impossible, creating a symmetrical exchange of competencies. The cross-reward mechanic in Przemyśl dla odkrywców [53] (see Supplementary Materials, Table S1 ID: PTE) grants tourists library stamps and residents a “city ambassador” certificate, allowing both groups to temporarily step outside their habitual roles. In Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis, a similar effect is achieved through the exchange of municipality cards required to complete the full infrastructure map, compelling players to temporarily shift their geographic identity.

The analysis reveals that educational and promotional games differ primarily in their dominant motivational regime: in the former, the most important reward is cognitive and systemic (e.g., improvement in quality of life within the simulation), while in the latter, it is hedonic or collectible reinforcement. Cross-over mechanics emerge when exploratory stimuli are added to educational structures, or when marketing games incorporate deeper models of urban decision-making. Role-switching acts as a catalyst: a sudden reversal of perspective opens a space for empathy, which on one hand enhances the effectiveness of learning, and on the other hand builds a stronger-because more personal-relationship with the city brand.

4. Discussion

Advantages and Limitations of Games in the Context of Urban Education

The choice of game medium-physical, digital, or hybrid-has a significant impact on the nature and “density” of the educational experience, its accessibility, depth of interaction, and the ability to represent complex urban processes. Each type of medium entails specific opportunities, but also limitations, which should be considered not only from a technological perspective but also from cognitive, social, and operational standpoints. Linking back to our methods, the dual pathway-expert reading of radar profiles and a weighted statistical analysis-helps explain why certain dimensions (e.g., decision-making realism, place-based relevance) dominate the between-cluster differences reported in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5.

In the analyzed set of 42 urban games, a wide variety of interfaces and information channels is evident-from simple analog formats (boards, cards), through hybrid solutions (QR, AR), to digital simulation environments (computer games, Minecraft). In many cases, players must simultaneously operate across multiple media types, which significantly raises the entry threshold and increases cognitive demands, regardless of the formal difficulty level of the game mechanics.

Physical games-especially board games, model-based formats, or analog team simulations-stand out primarily due to their materiality and accessibility. They allow participants to directly manipulate objects, supporting spatial thinking and symbolic representation of urban mechanisms. They are characterized by a high degree of transparency-both in terms of rules and the consequences of decisions-and foster the creation of a shared space for action and communication. Players share a physical table, observe each other’s moves, and are compelled to negotiate, making these games powerful tools for developing participatory competencies. Their simpler structure, often perceived as a limitation, can be an educational advantage, as it forces focus on key mechanisms and facilitates reflection. From a practical standpoint, physical games are also relatively inexpensive and easy to produce locally, enabling adaptation to the context of a specific city or district. However, their limitations include low scalability, the need for moderation, lack of automatic data collection, and relatively limited capacity to simulate complex dynamic systems.

Digital games, on the other hand, offer rich simulation potential. They can represent multilayered, dynamic urban systems, process data in real time, generate statistics, and enable exploration of multiple scenarios. They also facilitate individualized experiences-the user can play independently, at their own pace, in any location. Their immersive potential (especially in 3D environments) enhances cognitive engagement, particularly among younger participants. However, digital games also carry several limitations-high hardware requirements, hidden operational algorithms, fragmented experiences, and the absence of a physically shared space. The screen-based interface isolates participants from one another, reduces interpersonal contact, and hinders the creation of a shared experience. Participation in digital games is often individual, which may conflict with the goals of participatory education. Additionally, the production costs of digital games-especially custom-developed ones-are high, significantly limiting their potential for local adaptation.

Most location-based games in the analyzed set require real-world movement between narrative points, which in practice translates to light-to-moderate physical activity (~3–5 METs; Metabolic Equivalent of Task). A similar effect has been documented in studies on LBGs (Location-Based Games): a 25% increase in step count among Pokémon GO players [54,55]. Thus, the analyzed titles may meet the criteria for promoting a healthy lifestyle, although the effect depends on route length and mechanics that enforce movement. In our sample, such titles typically showed high place-based relevance alongside concise knowledge delivery, consistent with their location-dependent design.

Hybrid solutions-such as urban games with mobile components, board/card games supported by apps, or VR experiments-combine the advantages of both worlds but also inherit their limitations. One critical barrier is the socioeconomic disparity in access and digital literacy. The use of advanced technologies such as augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) may exclude individuals who lack access to appropriate hardware or the skills to navigate digital interfaces. Interface complexity and the number of information channels directly affect rule clarity and the required level of player competence. Mobile field apps enable the integration of real-world spatial activity with digital narrative and data management, but often fragment the group experience, making communication and joint planning more difficult. VR environments potentially allow for co-presence within a city model, but come with serious ergonomic and hardware limitations-VR headsets are heavy, isolating, and restrict physical movement. In practice, most hybrid games remain experimental, non-standard, and difficult to implement without an interdisciplinary team. Their greatest potential lies in creating immersive local experiences, while their main barrier is low replicability and organizational complexity [56]. These barriers can be mitigated through inclusive design strategies, such as offering low-tech or analog versions of games, providing public access to devices in community centers, and incorporating onboarding sessions to improve digital competencies among participants.

Interface complexity correlates with rule complexity and the expected age of the user: the more communication channels (visual, spatial, social), the higher the level of autonomy and competence expected from the player. This is particularly true for games combining physical and digital components.

In games designed for individual play, accessibility is increased by tutorials and introductory modes, while in group games-by moderation. The presence of a facilitator enables even less experienced participants to understand abstract social and organizational mechanisms. It is worth noting, however, that some of these games (e.g., Rozegraj Miasto 2.0) were designed as one-time experiences serving a specific educational purpose (e.g., familiarizing participants with the logic of multilateral negotiation), which further requires precise preparation and facilitation, making the role of the moderator particularly important [10].

In the case of hybrid solutions, two aspects limiting accessibility deserve particular attention: first, the presence of digital barriers resulting from a lack of technological competence or limited access to appropriate equipment, which may effectively exclude some potential participants; second, the difficulty of interface unification when a game combines multiple media types (e.g., board, cards, mobile app, AR), which leads to fragmented experiences and requires high design precision. These limitations mean that the virtual component of a game is often an optional enhancement that increases gameplay quality and player engagement, but is not a core mechanic-the game can function without it (as in the analyzed Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis).

In terms of mechanics: simulation depth and local authenticity do not have to be mutually exclusive, and a perspectival twist is key to integrating the needs of tourists and residents. Designers should think modularly so that the same game can function both as a “civic lesson” and a “promotional quest” without losing coherence.

In conclusion, the choice of game medium, interface(s), and mechanics should be a deliberate design decision based not only on available technologies but primarily on the educational objective, the nature of participant relationships, and the institutional context. Physical games support collective thinking and local engagement; digital games-experimentation and scalability; and hybrid games-embedding narratives in real space. Each of these tools can be effective if their limitations are known and consciously integrated into the design structure. Combining multiple forms of communication can enhance game appeal, but without appropriate support (moderation, instructions, tutorials, equipment provision), it may become a barrier for some users-especially those with lower levels of technological or cognitive preparedness.

Although the main objective of this article was to outline a typology of games, during the literature review, analysis, and testing of games, certain additional benefits of such games were observed. These results are exploratory in nature and require more systematic analysis in future phases of research. Based on our five-cluster solution and the observed parameter patterns (Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5), we discuss the potential benefits of appropriately designed and profiled games. The elements are ranked by importance:

• Social and cultural integration

One of the key benefits of urban games is that urban and metropolitan games can support the integration of metropolitan communities by fostering a sense of belonging and shared identity. Through collaborative gameplay, residents can better understand the structure and functioning of the town or metropolis, which promotes social cohesion. Various application scenarios can be proposed—among them, the organization of a selected type of game from a broad spectrum, ranging from outdoor games within a district or city to board games held in a local cultural center or other meeting place, which engage residents in joint activities, fostering mutual acquaintance and the building of neighborhood relationships. This is consistent with higher scores on Place-Based Relevance and content-centric Project Character observed in several clusters.

2.

Enhancement of civic engagement

Games can increase civic engagement by encouraging residents to actively participate in metropolitan or town life. Through simulations and game scenarios, participants can gain a better understanding of decision-making processes and metropolitan governance. This benefit appears to be particularly important in the context of public participation, which plays a crucial role in spatial planning, improving transportation, and designing activities within participatory budgeting. This is aligned with the dominance of content-related dimensions in our effect-size hierarchy. Comparative participation outcomes were not measured. Such findings have been primarily reported in studies concerning serious games.

3.

Promotion of local tourism

Another important benefit of urban games is that games can serve as tools for promoting local tourism, encouraging both residents and visitors to discover lesser-known places within the metropolis. They may include information about tourist attractions, historical landmarks, and local events. Tourists and residents who participate in urban games that guide them through lesser-known monuments, local events, and hidden attractions are encouraged to explore the city.

4.

Support for innovation

Games can be tools for fostering innovation in metropolitan management. As part of public consultations, through simulations and experimentation, participants can test new urban and technological solutions and strategies that support planning processes and may later be implemented in real-world contexts. The use of games incorporating AR/VR technologies can also innovatively visualize change scenarios and new visions of urban spaces for residents.

5.

Increasing spatial awareness

An important benefit of urban games is their potential to enhance residents’ spatial awareness by educating them about the urban layout of the metropolis, its transportation network, and other spatial aspects. Engagement in educational games facilitates a deeper understanding of the functional and spatial organization of the city or metropolis, as well as the interdependencies between its various components, conceived as elements of a larger urban system.

6.

Building metropolitan identity

Games can also help build the identity of a metropolis by promoting its unique features and values. Through narratives and game mechanics, participants can gain a deeper understanding of the metropolis’s history, culture and heritage.

7.

Support for historical education

Games can support historical education by teaching participants about the history and development of the metropolis over time. Through narratives and game scenarios, participants can gain a better understanding of the metropolis’s past by visiting or learning about places associated with significant historical events and figures. While historical education through games holds cultural value, it is less relevant to the everyday functioning of the city or metropolis, public participation, decision-making processes, or investment-related activities.

8.

Increasing investment attractiveness

Urban games can contribute to enhancing the investment attractiveness of a metropolis by showcasing its economic potential and investment opportunities, for instance during industry events, conferences, and training sessions for prospective investors. Through simulations and game-based scenarios, participants gain a clearer understanding of the benefits associated with investing in the metropolitan area. This benefit is primarily relevant to decision-makers and investors, rather than to residents.

9.

Promotion of healthy lifestyles

Those among the analyzed games that involve physical movement in the field can promote healthy lifestyles by encouraging physical activity and healthy habits. They may include elements related to walking, cycling or using recreational spaces. However, their effectiveness depends on the form of the game and the level of participant engagement. Moreover, such initiatives are not long-term interventions and tend to have limited impact.

10.

Environmental education

Games can be used to promote environmental education in metropolitan areas. Through game mechanics, participants can learn about sustainable development, environmental protection, and natural resource management.

While urban games demonstrate significant potential in fostering civic engagement, it is important to contextualize their effectiveness in comparison to traditional participatory tools such as public hearings, surveys, and workshops. Unlike conventional methods, which often rely on passive information exchange and limited interaction, games offer immersive, scenario-based experiences that can simulate complex decision-making processes. For example, while public hearings may attract only a narrow demographic and often suffer from low attendance, game-based formats tend to engage a broader spectrum of participants, including younger and less politically active residents, by offering interactive and narrative-driven environments. Moreover, games can visualize abstract planning concepts and simulate outcomes, which traditional tools may struggle to convey effectively. However, games complement rather than replace hearings or workshops; their value lies in scenario-based rehearsal that precedes or enriches formal participation.

5. Conclusions

5.1. Key Results

This article demonstrates that metropolises, due to their complex urban structures, require innovative approaches to identifying and presenting their potential. Traditional methods may be insufficient to fully capture the dynamics and capabilities of these large agglomerations. Our typology indicates that content-related dimensions dominate over technical form (see Table 5), and clusters with high Promotional Function scores (η² = 0.79) align with marketing-oriented designs; thus, urban/metropolitan games may be well-suited for educational and territorial-marketing purposes, pending outcome-based evaluation.

Games such as Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis can simulate various urban development scenarios, enabling participants to understand complex urban processes and the interactions between different elements of a metropolis. Moreover, games can be used as marketing tools that attract the attention of investors and residents by showcasing the attractiveness and potential of a city and/or metropolis.

The paper highlights that urban and metropolitan games can play a significant role in territorial marketing. By engaging participants in interactive experiences, these games can effectively promote the values and unique features of a metropolis. The authors argue that games can be used to build a positive image of a city or metropolis, increase its visibility, and attract new investors. Through the use of games, cities and metropolises can effectively communicate their strengths and opportunities, which is crucial in the context of global urban competition.

Additionally, the conducted research shows that Metropoli—Game in the GZM Metropolis, developed at the Faculty of Architecture of the Silesian University of Technology, possesses a composition of features that positions it well in comparative analysis among other games and makes it a product that fills a specific educational and promotional niche.

Despite growing interest in game-based learning across various disciplines, the academic literature still lacks systematic analyses of the use of urban and metropolitan games as tools for territorial marketing and spatial education. Existing studies have primarily focused on the entertainment or educational aspects of games, overlooking their potential in promoting cities, building spatial awareness, and supporting social participation.

This article fills that research gap through a detailed analysis of 42 urban and metropolitan-themed games, considering their promotional and educational functions as well as gamification mechanisms. The proposed typology of games and multidimensional analysis of their features allow for an assessment of their usefulness as tools supporting the sustainable development of cities and metropolises. Thus, the study contributes a new, expanded perspective to the discourse on innovative forms of spatial communication and territorial marketing.

5.2. Study Limitations

Our conclusions should be interpreted in light of several limitations.

5.2.1. Sampling Frame and Selection Bias

The corpus is mostly European and modest in size (N = 42). It is also selective because titles with incomplete metadata were excluded. This filtering may induce selection bias (e.g., better-documented projects are overrepresented) and could affect cluster composition and between-group contrasts.

5.2.2. Context-Bound Designs

Several analog and site-specific games are strongly place-dependent and serve incidental audiences (e.g., tourists). Such titles are difficult to replicate cross-nationally and cannot be meaningfully ported to other contexts without redesign (IP, distribution), which limits external validity.

5.2.3. Measurement and Construct Validity

The operationalization relies on qualitative coding of seven parameters and their downstream weighting. Although inter-rater agreement for descriptor assignment was 100% (Cohen’s κ not applicable due to zero variance), the mapping from descriptors to weights is partly context-dependent; construct coverage may still be incomplete.

5.2.4. Weight Calibration and Potential “Double-Dipping”

Weights were calibrated using correlations estimated on the same dataset that was later used for clustering and ANOVA. While this follows our a priori design rule (to curb multicollinearity), it can inflate apparent separability (“optimism bias”). We did not run alternative weighting schemes or cross-validation, so boundary sharpness should be interpreted cautiously.

5.2.5. Clustering Design Choices

The pre-specified number of clusters (k = 5) is supported by quality indices, but alternative k could yield different within-cluster granularity. We also rely on a specific distance metric and algorithm (k-means with Euclidean distance); different metrics (e.g., Gower for mixed/ordinal data) might alter assignments at the margins.

5.2.6. Statistical Assumptions with Ordinal Inputs

ANOVA on aggregated/weighted ordinal parameters is a pragmatic choice; although robust in many applications, it assumes approximate interval properties and homogeneity of variances. Violations could attenuate or exaggerate effect sizes.

5.2.7. Lack of Longitudinal/Behavioral Outcomes

For now, we do not track transfer beyond the game or persistence of educational effects. Consequently, claims about durability and real-world impact remain provisional.

5.2.8. Player-Population Biases

Structural skews in access and preferences (gender, socioeconomic status, platform, region/country) likely influence who enters the sample and how mechanics are interpreted, which can shape observed patterns.

Taken together, these factors narrow the scope of generalization and call for caution when interpreting the strength and stability of the observed differences.

Some limitations can be reduced by systematically expanding the game corpus (larger N) and enriching the set of described parameters/mechanics. However, issues mainly related to the player population (e.g., gender, socioeconomic status, platform/region) will probably remain persistent; they can only be partially mitigated through stratified sampling, oversampling of underrepresented groups, weighting of results, and transparent reporting of demographics.

5.3. Future Research Directions

In light of the conclusions and limitations discussed in previous sections, the following directions for future studies have been formulated-realistic within the Polish research context. These proposals take into account the limited availability of large, diverse samples and the monoethnic nature of the population, while leveraging the strengths of the existing corpus of games and authorial experience.

5.3.1. Qualitative Evaluation of Games’ Impact on Metropolitan Brand Perception

Short focus group sessions (8–12 participants) organized in game clubs or cultural centers will allow for comparison of spontaneous associations with the metropolis before and after gameplay. Thematic analysis of discussion transcripts—supplemented by a pre-post survey—will enable preliminary insights into changes in “place attachment” or visitation intent, without requiring large samples. Follow-up with participants after a period (e.g., six months) will allow verification of experience anchoring and its long-term durability.

5.3.2. In-Depth Analysis of Game Mechanics, Especially Cross-Over Mechanics

Future research should systematically compare how specific cross-over solutions (e.g., shared “city health” indicators, enforced role-switching, GPS exploration combined with decision-making simulation) simultaneously affect urban knowledge acquisition and place brand perception. The proposed program includes the following: (1) development of a taxonomy of cross-over micro-mechanics using sequential gameplay analysis; (2) a quasi-controlled experiment with three audience groups (residents, tourists, city-builder players), measuring both knowledge transfer (pre/post test) and changes in visitation/engagement intent; (3) a longitudinal study (minimum 6 months) tracking retention of systemic competencies and memory of branding elements. The results will help identify which mechanic configurations most effectively unify educational and marketing goals and suggest adaptation pathways for existing titles across different audience groups.

5.3.3. Semiotic Analysis of Game Content and Mechanics

Analysis of game messaging, including methods of competence acquisition and the effectiveness of branding narratives, through coding of game interface elements: boards, cards, instructions, and digital interfaces. Comparison of iconographic motifs, reward mechanics, narrative structure, and promotion systems (competition/cooperation) using a multidimensional coding system will help determine which game features most strongly support (or weaken) metropolitan messaging-both educational and promotional.

5.3.4. Implementation of Micro-Studies in Formal Education

Adapting selected games to civics or geography lessons in a single secondary school (n ≈ 30) will enable participant observation and measurement of urban competence development. Design-based research here combines instruction with evaluation and does not require substantial financial resources.

5.3.5. Cross-Cultural Comparisons

A significant factor influencing the outcomes of focus sessions and micro-studies may be Poland’s monoethnic character (over 96.28% of the population identifies as Polish) [57]. Collaboration with international institutions will enable broader and more diverse observation, facilitating access to a wider range of game types and cultural contexts. Furthermore, given the disproportionately high representation of European games in the current study, it would be methodologically advisable to broaden the research sample in future investigations to include games originating from non-European regions. Such expansion would enhance the cultural and contextual diversity of the sample, reduce potential geographical bias, and improve the generalizability and applicability of the findings across different socio-cultural environments.

5.3.6. Systematic Update of Game Reviews

Every 2–3 years, the research team may refresh the database using the PRISMA-scoping protocol. A publicly available repository (e.g., Zenodo) with DOI will serve as a source for future meta-syntheses and enable monitoring of emerging trends (e.g., hybrid games).

5.3.7. The Long-Term Impacts of Games

The implementation of urban games is not without limitations. One of them concerns the lack of longitudinal evidence regarding the sustained impact of urban games on civic behavior, policy outcomes, or urban development. Most existing studies focus on short-term engagement metrics or immediate feedback, leaving a gap in understanding how games influence long-term civic participation, spatial awareness, or community cohesion. To address this, future research should incorporate longitudinal follow-up studies that track behavioral changes, policy influence, and community dynamics over extended periods. Such studies would provide a more robust foundation for evaluating the strategic value of games in urban governance and planning.

6. Patents

Metropolis—Game in the GZM, used in the research and described in this manuscript, holds several patents. This board game was developed by, among others, some of the authors of the article: Tomasz Bradecki, Justyna Nowak, Paulina Siudyka, and Karolina Dębczak.

February 2025—Design applications filed with the Polish Patent Office:

• Industrial design no. Wp.33115—Metropolis Game Board
• Industrial design no. Wp.33207—Game Pawns

May 2025—Utility application filed with the Polish Patent Office –

• Utility design filed with the Silesian University of Technology under no. ZDI/2024/200—Game element “Connector”.