LoRattle - An Exploratory Game with a Purpose Using LoRa and IoT

  • Marko RadetaEmail author
  • Miguel Ribeiro
  • Dinarte Vasconcelos
  • Nuno Jardim Nunes
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11863)


The Internet of Things (IoT) is opening new possibilities for sensing, monitoring and actuating in urban environments. They support a shift to a hybrid network of humans and things collaborating in production, transmission and processing of data through low-cost and low power devices connected via long-range (LoRa) wide area networks (WAN). This paper describes a 2-player duel game based on IoT controllers and LoRa radio communication protocol. Here we report on the main evaluation dimensions of this new design space for games, namely: (i) game usability (SUS) leading to an above average score; (ii) affective states of the players (SAM) depicting pleasant and engaging gameplay, while players retain control; (iii) radio coverage perception (RCP) showing that most participants did not change their perception of the radio distance after playing. Finally, we discuss the findings and propose future interactive applications to take advantage of this design space.


LoRa Internet of Things Tangible User Interfaces Games with a purpose Ubiquitous computing Radio coverage 



Reported study is part of LARGESCALE project with grant no. 32474 by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) and Portuguese National Funds (PIDDAC). It is also supported by MITIExcell grant M1420-01-0145-FEDER-000002 and LARSyS grant UID/EEA/50009/2019. In further, two FCT grants SFRH/BD/135854/2018 and SFRH/DB/136005/2018 assisted the study.


  1. 1.
    Adelantado, F., Vilajosana, X., Tuset-Peiro, P., Martinez, B., Melia-Segui, J., Watteyne, T.: Understanding the limits of LoRaWAN. IEEE Commun. Mag. 55(9), 34–40 (2017). Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Kashoash, H., Kemp, A.H.: Comparison of 6LOWPAN and LPWAN for the internet of things. Aust. J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 13(4), 268–274 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Althoff, T., White, R.W., Horvitz, E.: Influence of Pokémon GO on physicalactivity: study and implications. J. Med. Internet Res. 18(12), e315 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antifakos, S., Schiele, B.: Bridging the gap between virtual and physical games using wearable sensors. In: Proceedings of Sixth International Symposium on Wearable Computers, (ISWC 2002), pp. 139–140. IEEE (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atzori, L., Iera, A., Morabito, G.: SIoT: giving a social structure to the internet of things. IEEE Commun. Lett. 15(11), 1193–1195 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Augustin, A., Yi, J., Clausen, T., Townsley, W.M.: A study of lora: long range & low power networks for the internet of things. Sensors 16(9), 1466 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Avouris, N.M., Yiannoutsou, N.: A review of mobile location-based games for learning across physical and virtual spaces. J. UCS 18(15), 2120–2142 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bankov, D., Khorov, E., Lyakhov, A.: On the limits of LoRaWAN channel access. In: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Engineering and Telecommunication (EnT), Moscow, Russia, pp. 29–30 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bor, M., Vidler, J.E., Roedig, U.: LoRa for the internet of things (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J.: Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 25(1), 49–59 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brooke, J., et al.: SUS-a quick and dirty usability scale. Usabil. Eval. Ind. 189(194), 4–7 (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burke, J.A., et al.: Participatory sensing (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Colley, A., et al.: The geography of Pokémon GO: beneficial and problematic effects on places and movement. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1179–1192. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D.J., DeFanti, T.A., Kenyon, R.V., Hart, J.C.: The CAVE: audio visual experience automatic virtual environment. Commun. ACM 35(6), 64–73 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de la Guía, E., Lozano, M.D., Penichet, V.M.: Interacting with objects in games through RFID technology. In: Radio Frequency Identification from System to Applications. InTech (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hinske, S., Langheinrich, M.: Using a movable RFID antenna to automatically determine the position and orientation of objects on a tabletop. In: Roggen, D., Lombriser, C., Tröster, G., Kortuem, G., Havinga, P. (eds.) EuroSSC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5279, pp. 14–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ishii, H.: Tangible bits: beyond pixels. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, pp. xv–xxv. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jain, S., Parkes, D.C.: A game-theoretic analysis of games with a purpose. In: Papadimitriou, C., Zhang, S. (eds.) WINE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5385, pp. 342–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  19. 19.
    King, D.R., Rowan, J.C., Johnson, D.D., Reis, B.E.: Faraday cage. US Patent 5,761,053, 2 June 2 1998Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kranz, M., Holleis, P., Schmidt, A.: Embedded interaction: interacting with the internet of things. IEEE Internet Comput. 14(2), 46–53 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marais, J.M., Malekian, R., Abu-Mahfouz, A.M.: LoRa and LoRaWAN testbeds: a review. In: 2017 IEEE AFRICON, pp. 1496–1501. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Prandi, C., Salomoni, P., Roccetti, M., Nisi, V., Nunes, N.J.: Walking with geo-zombie: a pervasive game to engage people in urban crowdsourcing. In: 2016 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), pp. 1–5. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Qin, Z., McCann, J.A.: Resource efficiency in low-power wide-area networks for IoT applications. In: 2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference, GLOBECOM 2017, pp. 1–7. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Radeta, M., Cesario, V., Matos, S., Nisi, V.: Gaming versus storytelling: understanding children’s interactive experiences in a museum setting. In: Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V. (eds.) ICIDS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10690, pp. 163–178. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  25. 25.
    Robbins, S.J., Westerinen, W.J., Hanson, L.M., Son, S.H., Wattles, R.J.: Augmented reality and physical games. US Patent 9,717,981, 1 August 2017Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Römer, K., Domnitcheva, S.: Smart playing cards: a ubiquitous computing game. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 6(5–6), 371–377 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sinclair, J., Hingston, P., Masek, M.: Considerations for the design of exergames. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques in Australia and Southeast Asia, pp. 289–295. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Von Ahn, L.: Games with a purpose. Computer 39(6), 92–94 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Von Ahn, L., Dabbish, L.: Designing games with a purpose. Commun. ACM 51(8), 58–67 (2008)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wilson, D.E.: Designing for the pleasures of disputation-or-how to make friends by trying to kick them!. IT University of Copenhagen, Innovative Communication (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marko Radeta
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miguel Ribeiro
    • 2
  • Dinarte Vasconcelos
    • 2
  • Nuno Jardim Nunes
    • 2
  1. 1.ITI/LARSySUniversidade da Madeira, TigerwhaleFunchalPortugal
  2. 2.ITI/LARSySInstituto Superior TécnicoLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations