Players that are less skilled clearly have a disadvantage, which is referred to as a ‘handicap’. Another well-known example of explicit static balancing is the ‘handicap rule’ in golf. The balancing mechanism is explicit and static: the less experienced player is allowed to place one to nine stones already on the board at the start of the game, depending on the difference in expertise between the two players. The game ‘Go’, which originated in China more than 2500 years ago, already contained the possibility for two players with different expertise to play an equal match that is challenging for both. Balancing a game for players with different skill levels is not something new. The players themselves remained unaware of this balancing mechanism until we told them it was in place.

Because we used new technology, we were able to create a dynamically and implicitly balanced game: the game constantly assesses the player’s skill levels and dynamically applies balancing rules. To answer these questions a digital tabletop game with tangible interaction, featuring a balancing mechanism, was developed. It might, however, also reduce the willingness of people to play because they do not want to be identified as the weaker player among other players. It could be argued that making the difference in skill level explicit encourages the weaker player to improve his/her skills in order to participate at the same level.

Second, we explored whether people prefer implicitly or explicitly balanced games. First, we studied whether balancing a game changes the fun experience people have during the game in comparison to an unbalanced version. We further distinguish statically balanced games (based on skill level before the game) and dynamically balanced games (based on performance during the game). In an explicitly balanced game, they are. In an implicitly balanced game, the players are not aware of the balancing mechanism. Balancing a game can be done implicitly or explicitly. When players are kept away from states where the game is boring or frustrating they are guided through the so-called ‘flow channel’ (see Figure 1), first described by Csikszentmihalyi and put into a gaming context by Koster. Boredom or frustration decreases fun, because challenge is not optimal. Conversely, when an opponent is too challenging a game is frustrating. When no effort is needed to beat an opponent a game is boring. Offering a suitable amount of challenge can be difficult when people with different skills play together. Fun in games is influenced by three factors: fantasy, challenge and curiosity.

this paper we present a study that focuses on the balancing of differences in players’ skill levels in a game.

Perfect balance 2 game