Players’ Opinions on Control and Playability of a BCI Game

  • Hayrettin Gürkök
  • Bram van de Laar
  • Danny Plass-Oude Bos
  • Mannes Poel
  • Anton Nijholt
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8514)


Brain-computer interface (BCI) games can satisfy our need for competence by providing us with challenges that we should enjoy tackling. However, many BCI games that claim to provide enjoyable challenges fail to do so. Some common fallacies and pitfalls about BCI games play a role in this failure and in this paper we report on a study that we carried out to empirically investigate them. More specifically, we explored (1) active and passive interaction with BCI games, (2) BCI gaming as a skill and (3) playability of a BCI game. We conducted an experiment with 42 participants who played a popular computer game called World of Warcraft using a commercial BCI headset called EPOC. We conducted interviews about the participants’ experiences of the game and ran a phenomenological analysis on their responses. The analysis results showed that (1) the players would like to play a BCI game actively if the BCI controls critical game elements, (2) the technical challenges of BCI cannot motivate the players to play a BCI game and (3) the players’ enjoyment of one-time playing of a BCI game does not imply playability of the game.


Computer Game Alpha Rhythm Game Character Pragmatic Quality Relaxation Estimation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gürkök, H., Nijholt, A.: Brain-computer interfaces for multimodal interaction: A survey and principles. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 28(5), 292–307 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tan, D., Nijholt, A.: Brain-computer interfaces and human-computer interaction. In: Brain-Computer Interfaces, pp. 3–19. Springer, London (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gürkök, H., Nijholt, A., Poel, M.: Brain-computer interface games: Towards a framework. In: Herrlich, M., Malaka, R., Masuch, M. (eds.) ICEC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7522, pp. 373–380. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nijholt, A., Reuderink, B., Oude Bos, D.: Turning shortcomings into challenges: Brain-computer interfaces for games. Entertainment Computing 1(2), 85–94 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tatum, W.O., Dworetzky, B.A., Schomer, D.L.: Artifact and recording concepts in EEG. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 28(3), 252–263 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mühl, C., Gürkök, H., Plass-Oude Bos, D., Thurlings, M.E., Scherffig, L., Duvinage, M., Elbakyan, A.A., Kang, S., Poel, M., Heylen, D.: Bacteria Hunt: Evaluating multi-paradigm BCI interaction. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 4(1), 11–25 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    George, L., Lotte, F., Abad, R., Lecuyer, A.: Using scalp electrical biosignals to control an object by concentration and relaxation tasks: Design and evaluation. In: 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS, pp. 6299–6302. IEEE, Piscataway (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gürkök, H.: Mind the Sheep! User Experience Evaluation & Brain-Computer Interface Games. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liao, L.D., Lin, C.T., McDowell, K., Wickenden, A.E., Gramann, K., Jung, T.P., Ko, L.W., Chang, J.Y.: Biosensor technologies for augmented brain-computer interfaces in the next decades. Proceedings of the IEEE 100, 1553–1566 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sokolowski, R.: Introduction to Phenomenology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nardi, B., Harris, J.: Strangers and friends: Collaborative play in World of Warcraft. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 149–158. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yee, N., Ducheneaut, N., Nelson, L., Likarish, P.: Introverted elves & conscientious gnomes: The expression of personality in World of Warcraft. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 753–762. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Billieux, J., van der Linden, M., Achab, S., Khazaal, Y., Paraskevopoulos, L., Zullino, D., Thorens, G.: Why do you play World of Warcraft? An in-depth exploration of self-reported motivations to play online and in-game behaviours in the virtual world of Azeroth. Computers in Human Behavior 29(1), 103–109 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nijholt, A., Plass-Oude Bos, D., Reuderink, B.: Turning shortcomings into challenges: Brain–computer interfaces for games. Entertainment Computing 1(2), 85–94 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Scherer, R., Friedrich, E.C.V., Allison, B., Pröll, M., Chung, M., Cheung, W., Rao, R.P.N., Neuper, C.: Non-invasive brain-computer interfaces: Enhanced gaming and robotic control. In: Cabestany, J., Rojas, I., Joya, G. (eds.) IWANN 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6691, pp. 362–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deuschl, G., Eisen, A. (eds.): Recommendations for the Practice of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moore, N.C.: The neurotherapy of anxiety disorders. Journal of Adult Development 12, 147–154 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quek, M., Höhne, J., Murray-Smith, R., Tangermann, M.: Designing future BCIs: Beyond the bit rate. In: Towards Practical Brain-Computer Interfaces, pp. 173–196. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vaughan, T.M., Sellers, E.W., Wolpaw, J.R.: Clinical evaluation of BCIs. In: Brain-Computer Interfaces: Principles and Practice, pp. 325–336. Oxford University Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van de Laar, B., Gürkök, H., Plass-Oude Bos, D., Poel, M., Nijholt, A.: Experiencing BCI control in a popular computer game. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games 5(2), 176–184 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Starks, H., Brown Trinidad, S.: Choose your method: A comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research 17(10), 1372–1380 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tesch, R.: Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools. RoutledgeFalmer, London (1990)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Malterud, K.: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet 358(9280), 483–487 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gürkök, H., Nijholt, A., Poel, M., Obbink, M.: Evaluating a multi-player brain-computer interface game: Challenge versus co-experience. Entertainment Computing 4(3), 195–203 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hayrettin Gürkök
    • 1
  • Bram van de Laar
    • 1
  • Danny Plass-Oude Bos
    • 1
  • Mannes Poel
    • 1
  • Anton Nijholt
    • 1
  1. 1.Human Media Interaction GroupUniversity of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations