Arctic Shores Game-Based Assessment: What You Can (and Can't) Prepare For

Search for advice on the Arctic Shores assessment and you will find one answer repeated everywhere: "you can't prepare for it." That answer is convenient, widely copied — and only half true. Some of what Arctic Shores measures genuinely cannot be gamed, and trying to fake it works against you. But other parts of the assessment are ordinary cognitive performance under time pressure, and pretending those can't be prepared for is simply wrong.

This guide separates the two honestly, because if you have an Arctic Shores game-based assessment invitation from PwC, Siemens, Airbus or any of the hundred-plus employers using the platform, the worst thing you can do is walk in with no idea what is coming — and the second worst is to spend hours trying to rehearse the unrehearsable.

What is the Arctic Shores assessment?

Arctic Shores is a UK-based assessment company whose product replaces question-and-answer psychometric tests with a series of short interactive tasks — the company calls it task-based assessment. Instead of reading a passage and choosing True or False, you play through mini-tasks: reacting to prompts, making quick decisions, balancing risk and reward, remembering sequences, judging quantities or patterns. Not published Arctic Shores publishes no overall time limit, and the assessment does not have one: the individual tasks are timed, the sitting as a whole is not. Individual task timings are reported by preparation providers: the numerical Analysis task at about 18 questions in 18 minutes, the abstract Patterns task at 20 questions in 17 minutes. Reported Beyond that, no publisher figure exists. One preparation guide (Hacking the Case Interview) suggests allowing 75 to 85 minutes for the full suite; employers licence different subsets of tasks, so yours may be much shorter.

The design principle matters: the platform is not primarily scoring whether you "win" each game. It collects thousands of behavioural data points — how quickly you respond, how you handle setbacks, how consistent you are, how much risk you take, how you trade speed against accuracy — and builds a profile of your working style and cognitive characteristics from them. Employers then compare that profile against what they are looking for in the role.

Confirmed Employers use bespoke versions. PwC's "Career Unlocked", used in its UK graduate recruitment, is a tailored Arctic Shores assessment built around ten tasks; other employers configure different task sets. Older candidate threads mention "Skyrise City" — an earlier Arctic Shores product generation; reports from those threads may not describe the version you sit.

What can you not prepare for in an Arctic Shores assessment?

A large share of what the assessment measures is behavioural: appetite for risk, persistence after failure, decision style, consistency of effort. Two things make faking these a bad strategy.

First, you do not know the target. Unlike a numerical test, where more correct answers is always better, behavioural traits are matched to a role profile. More risk-taking is not universally good; neither is more caution. Candidates on forums note — correctly — that you can "do well" at the games in an arcade sense and still not match the profile, because the employer is looking for fit, not a high score.

Second, the measurement is behavioural, not self-reported. On a questionnaire you can describe yourself generously. Here, the data is what you actually did across hundreds of micro-decisions, with internal consistency checks built in across tasks. Playing a character consistently across an hour or more of micro-decisions, under time pressure, is far harder than just being deliberate and natural — and an inconsistent performance is itself a signal.

The honest advice for the behavioural layer is the boring advice: be rested, be focused, make real decisions at your natural tempo, and let the profile be accurate. If the role is a genuine mismatch for how you work, discovering that at the screening stage is cheaper than discovering it six months into the job.

What can you prepare for in an Arctic Shores assessment?

None of the above means preparation is worthless. Three layers of the assessment respond directly to it — and the first of them is the same cognitive skill every other provider tests, which is why it is worth reading the complete guide to UK graduate aptitude tests alongside this one.

The cognitive layer. Several Arctic Shores tasks lean on measurable cognitive abilities: rapid numeracy, pattern recognition, working memory, processing speed. These are the same underlying capacities conventional aptitude tests measure — delivered in game form — and they respond to training like any other timed cognitive skill. A candidate whose mental arithmetic is quick and confident under a clock carries that advantage into task-based formats. If your numerical reasoning is rusty, that is fixable, and fixing it helps you across every provider's tests in your application season, not just this one.

The familiarity layer. First encounters with an unfamiliar format are always noisy. Knowing in advance that you will face a sequence of short instruction-driven tasks — reading each task's instructions properly instead of skimming, expecting abrupt switches between task types, not panicking when one task feels like it went badly — removes noise that has nothing to do with your actual ability. Employers and university careers services alike stress reading the instructions; it is the single most repeated piece of genuine advice from candidates who have sat it.

The conditions layer. The assessment is usually a one-attempt event with real consequences, so treat the logistics seriously: a quiet room, a full battery or mains power, a stable connection, no interruptions for the full sitting, and the device the invitation recommends. Candidates report completing it on both computer and phone depending on the employer's setup — use whichever the invitation specifies, set up properly, and do it when you are alert rather than at midnight before the deadline.

For Arctic Shores set against SHL, Aon and Cappfinity, row by row, see the provider comparison table.

The realistic strategy

So the honest split is this: prepare the cognitive layer, familiarise yourself with the format, control your conditions — and then let the behavioural measurement see the real you. That combination outperforms both extremes: the candidate who "couldn't prepare" and went in cold, and the candidate who tried to act their way through an hour of micro-decisions.

The cognitive layer is also the part you can measure today. Before you start preparing, find out where you actually stand. The Acumen Logic Benchmark is a free, one-shot diagnostic — 20 questions under real timed conditions, taken once, like the real thing. It shows you your estimated percentile and whether your numerical, verbal or logical reasoning needs work before assessment invitations start arriving.

Common questions