A Videogame Driven by the Mind: Are Motor Acts Necessary to Play?

  • Luigi BianchiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1129)


In this manuscript, the architecture of a PC based videogame driven by just electroencephalographic (EEG) brain signals is described. It bypasses the natural pathways of nerves and muscles, thus theoretically allowing also people affected by severe motor disorders to play with it. It is built on top of a framework designed for implementing neuro-feedback and Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) systems: spontaneous self-induced modifications of the EEG signals are detected and converted into an analog-like value, which is then used to control the speed of a puppet that competes in a virtual race against others whose speed is controlled by the PC. Preliminary results from five healthy volunteers and comparing three different regression rules show that is possible, after a short calibration phase, to take the control of the puppet by performing simple and repetitive motor imagery mental tasks. Actually, it is under testing in clinical contexts, to rehabilitate children affected by ADHD syndrome and autism but it can be also used as an inclusive game, to allow motor disabled people to play with the same rules with their acquaintances, relatives, and friends.


Neuro-feedback Regression Videogame Inclusion 


  1. 1.
    Johnstone, S.J., Roodenrys, S.J., Johnson, K., Bonfield, R., Bennett, S.J.: Game-based combined cognitive and neurofeedback training using Focus Pocus reduces symptom severity in children with diagnosed AD/HD and subclinical AD/HD. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 116, 32–44 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bakhtadze, S., Beridze, M., Geladze, N., Khachapuridze, N., Bornstein, N.: Effect of EEG biofeedback on cognitive flexibility in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder with and without epilepsy. Appl. Psychophysiol. Biofeedback 41(1), 71–79 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marzbani, H., Marateb, H.R., Mansourian, M.: Neurofeedback: a comprehensive review on system design, methodology and clinical applications. Basic Clin. Neurosci. 7(2), 143–158 (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nan, W., Wan, F., Chang, L., Pun, S.H., Vai, M.I., Rosa, A.: An exploratory study of intensive neurofeedback training for schizophrenia. Behav. Neurol. 2017(2), 1–6 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alves-Pinto, A., Turova, V., Blumenstein, T., Hantuschke, C., Lampe, R.: Implicit learning of a finger motor sequence by patients with cerebral palsy after neurofeedback. Appl. Psychophysiol. Biofeedback 42(1), 27–37 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reichert, J.L., Kober, S.E., Schweiger, D., Grieshofer, P., Neuper, C., Wood, G.: Shutting down sensorimotor interferences after stroke: a proof-of-principle SMR neurofeedback study. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 15(10), 348 (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Renton, T., Tibbles, A., Topolovec-Vranic, J.: Neurofeedback as a form of cognitive rehabilitation therapy following stroke: a systematic review. PLoS One 12(5), e0177290 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kober, S.E., Schweiger, D., Witte, M., Reichert, J.L., Grieshofer, P., Neuper, C., Wood, G.: Specific effects of EEG based neurofeedback training on memory functions in post-stroke victims. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 12, 107 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bennett, C.N., Gupta, R.K., Prabhakar, P., Christopher, R., Sampath, S., Thennarasu, K., Rajeswaran, J.: Clinical and biochemical outcomes following EEG neurofeedback training in traumatic brain injury in the context of spontaneous recovery. Clin. EEG Neurosci. 49(6), 433–440 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jeunet, C., Glize, B., McGonigal, A., Batail, J.M., Micoulaud-Franchi, J.A.: Using EEG-based brain computer interface and neurofeedback targeting sensorimotor rhythms to improve motor skills: theoretical background, applications and prospects. Neurophysiol. Clin. pii: S0987-7053(18)30259-4 (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bianchi, L.: Speedy’O’Brain: a neuro-feedback videogame driven by electroencephalographic signals. Int. J. Biol. Biomed. Eng. 12, 229–234 (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bianchi, L., Babiloni, F., Cincotti, F., Salinari, S., Marciani, M.G.: Introducing BF++: a C++ framework for cognitive bio-feedback systems design. Methods Inf. Med. 42, 104–110 (2003). ISSN 0026-1270Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bianchi, L., Quitadamo, L.R., Marciani, M.G., Maraviglia, B., Abbafati, M., Garreffa, G.: How the NPX data format handles EEG data acquired simultaneously with fMRI. Magn. Reson. Imaging 25(6), 1011–1014 (2007). ISSN 0730-725XGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bianchi, L.: The NPXLab suite 2018: a free features rich set of tools for the analysis of neuro-electric signals. WSEAS Trans. Syst. Control 13, 145–152 (2018). Art. #18. ISSN/E-ISSN 1991-8763/2224-2856Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bianchi, L.: The software model of the ‘Speedy’O’Brain’ neuro-feedback videogame. Int. J. Circ. Syst. Signal Process. 13, 543–549 (2019). ISSN 1998-4464Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bianchi, L.: Brain-computer interface systems: why a standard model is essential on BCI standards. In: 2018 IEEE Life Sciences Conference, Montreal (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering and Computer Science“Tor Vergata” University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations