The aim of the presentation is to discuss strengths and weaknesses of a land-use scenario game conducted with planning practitioners from the Leipzig-Halle urban region. Within the European research project PLUREL, such scenario games are carried out to understand and assess demographically and economically induced land-use change. Objectives of the Leipzig-Halle game were to invite discussions on drivers and implications of land-use developments, to support practitioners in dealing with uncertain futures and to contribute to the research-practice exchange within PLUREL. Scientists and practitioners visualised possible development paths of the Leipzig-Halle region. This included scenarios of growth and shrinkage. The following scenario assumptions were made for three games: “uncontrolled growth”, “managed growth” and “managed shrinkage”. These assumptions were based on different combinations of general factors driving land-use change: population, economy and spatial planning. Focal points of the game were patterns as well as social, economic and environmental implications of land use. The scenario game placed participants in a virtual future and it was carried out in three, consecutive stages: Firstly, participants developed a spatial scenario, using a short story set in the year 2025 as an input. Participants had a blank map, a number of land use tokens according to the scenario as well as pens and glue to map out and sketch their vision of land use development. Then, focus groups were conducted for each scenario regarding drivers of land-use change and land-use conflicts. Finally, resultant scenarios were critically assessed. The scenario game method enabled the participants to discuss and visualize their ideas. This allowed for a deliberation about regional development options. Through its set-up, the scenario game simulated “real world” spatial planning, where spatial development is usually based on the interaction of different stakeholders. The method’s strength lay in the fact that it gave insights into perceptions of researchers and local and regional stakeholders regarding future land use. However, results are biased, as it is unlikely that participants represent all possible actors involved in real world planning processes.