Games Robots Play: Once More, with Feeling

  • Ruth AylettEmail author
Part of the Socio-Affective Computing book series (SAC, volume 4)


In this chapter we first examine the requirements for social game-play robots in three game scenario types: robot play companions, robots and digitised games, robots and augmented reality. We consider issues relating to affect recognition, affective modelling in the robot, and robot expressive behaviour. We then discuss work in each of the three scenario types and how it has attempted to meet the requirements advanced. Finally the chapter considers key research issues for the future.


Robot play companions Robots and digitised games Robots and augmented reality-AR Social robots Theory of mind-ToM 



Some of the work discussed in this paper was partially funded by the EU FP7 ICT-215554 project LIREC (Living with Robots and Interactive Companions) and the EU FP7 ICT-317923 project EMOTE. The author is solely responsible for the content of this publication. It does not represent the opinion of the EC, and the EC is not responsible for any use that might be made of data appearing therein. The author wishes to acknowledge the partners of both projects and especially the GAIPS group at INESC-ID.


  1. 1.
    Aylett RS (2004) Agents and affect: why embodied agents need affective systems. In: Methods and applications of artificial intelligence. Springer, pp 496–504Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aylett R, Kriegel M, Wallace I, Márquez Segura E, Mecurio J, Nylander S, Vargas P (2013) Do I remember you? Memory and identity in multiple embodiments. In: RO-MAN, 2013 IEEE. IEEE, pp 143–148Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breazeal C (2002) Designing social robots. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    van Breemen A, Yan X, Meerbeek B (2005) iCat: an animated user-interface robot with personality. In: Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, ACM, pp 143–144Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Castellano G, Pereira A, Leite I, Paiva A, McOwan PW (2009) Detecting user engagement with a robot companion using task and social interaction-based features. In: Proceedings of the 2009 international conference on multimodal interfaces, ACM, pp 119–126Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dennett DC (1989) The intentional stance. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dias J, Aylett R, Paiva A, Reis H (2013) The great deceivers: virtual agents and believable lies. Proc Cog Sci 2013:2189–2194Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donath J (2004) Artificial pets: simple behaviors elicit complex attachments. In: Bekoff M (ed) Encyclopedia of animal behaviorGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Duffy B (2000) The social robot. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University College DublinGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    EMOTE. Accessed 27 Sept 2015
  11. 11.
    Fernaeus Y, Håkansson M, Jacobsson M, Ljungblad S (2010) How do you play with a robotic toy animal? A long-term study of pleo. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on interaction design and children, ACM, pp 39–48Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fernandez JMA, Bonarini A (2013) Towards an autonomous theatrical robot. In: Affective computing and intelligent interaction (ACII), 2013 Humaine Association Conference on (pp 689–694). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fong T, Nourbakhsh IR, Dautenhahn K (2003) A survey of socially interactive robots. Robot Auton Syst 42(3–4):143–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fujita M (2004) On activating human communications with pet-type robot AIBO. Proc IEEE 92(11):1804–1813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Friedman B, Kahn PH Jr, Hagman J (2003) Hardware companions? What online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 273–280Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kidd CD, Taggart W, Turkle S (2006) A sociable robot to encourage social interaction among the elderly. In: Robotics and automation, 2006. ICRA 2006. Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference. IEEE, pp 3972–3976Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Knol E, De Vries P (2011) EnerCities, a serious game to stimulate sustainability and energy conservation: preliminary results. eLearning Pap 25:1887–1542Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Knight H (2011) Eight lessons learned about non-verbal interactions through robot theater. In: Social robotics. Springer, Berlin, pp 42–51Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kopp S, Krenn B, Marsella S, Marshall AN, Pelachaud C, Pirker H, Thórisson KR, Vilhjálmsson H (2006) Towards a common framework for multimodal generation: the behavior markup language. Proceedings of the IVA. Springer, pp 205–217Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kriegel M, Aylett RS, Cuba P, Vala M, Paiva A (2011) Robots meet IVAs: a mind-body interface for migrating artificial intelligent agents. IVA 2011 pp 282–295Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    LaFrance M (2008) What’s in a robot’s smile? The many meanings of positive facial display. Animating Expressive Characters for Social Interaction 74:37Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Le QA, Pelachaud C (2012) Generating co-speech gestures for the humanoid robot NAO through BML. In: Gesture and sign language in human-computer interaction and embodied communication. Springer, pp 228–237Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Leite I, Castellano G, Pereira A, Martinho C, Paiva A (2012) Modelling empathic behaviour in a robotic game companion for children: an ethnographic study in real-world settings. In: Proc HRI 2012. ACM, pp 367–374Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leite I, Pereira A, Martinho, C, Paiva A (2008) Are emotional robots more fun to play with? In: Robot and human interactive communication, 2008. RO-MAN 2008. 17th IEEE international symposium on. IEEE, pp 77–82Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lim MY, Aylett RS, Jones CM (2005) Emergent affective and personality model. IVA 2006. LNAI 3661:371–380Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lin CY, Cheng LC, Huang CC, Chuang LW, Teng WC, Kuo CH, Gu HY, Chung KL, Fahn CS (2013). Versatile humanoid robots for theatrical performances. Int J Adv Robotic Sy 10(7)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    LIREC. Accessed 22 Sept 2015
  28. 28.
    Magerkurth C, Cheok AD, Mandryk RL, Nilsen T (2005) Pervasive games: bringing computer entertainment back to the real world. Comput Entertain (CIE) 3(3):4–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mehrabian A (1977) Nonverbal communication. Transaction PublishersGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    de Melo C, Carnevale P, Gratch J (2011) Reverse appraisal: inferring from emotion displays who is the cooperator and the competitor in a social dilemma. In: Proc. Cog Sci 2011 pp 396–401Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ortony A, Clore G, Collins A (1988) The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pelachaud C (2005) Multimodal expressive embodied conversational agents, ICM 2005, pp 683–689Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pereira A, Prada R, Paiva A (2012) Socially present board game opponents. In: Advances in computer entertainment. Springer, Berlin, pp 101–116Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ribeiro T, Pereira A, Deshmukh A, Aylett R, Paiva A (2014) I’m the mayor: a robot tutor in enercities-2. In: Proc. AAMAS 2014. IFAAMAS, pp 1675–1676Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rodrigues SH, Mascarenhas S, Dias J, Paiva A (2014) A process model of empathy for virtual agents. Interact Comput, iwu001Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Segura EM, Kriegel M, Aylett R, Deshmukh A, Cramer H (2012) How do you like me in this: user embodiment preferences for companion agents. Springer, Berlin, pp 112–125, IIVA 2012Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sharkey A, Sharkey N (2012) Granny and the robots: ethical issues in robot care for the elderly. Ethics Inf Technol 14(1):27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Snyder M, Swann WB (1978) Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: from social perception to social reality. J Exp Soc Psychol 14(2):148–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sundstrom P (2005) Exploring the affective loop. Stockholm University, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Thiebaux M, Marsella S, Marshall AN, Kallmann M (2008) Smartbody: behavior realization for embodied conversational agents. In: Proc AAMAS-Vol 1. IFAAMAS, pp 151–158Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zeglin G, Walsman A, Herlant L, Zheng Z, Guo Y, Koval MC, … Srinivasa SS (2014) HERB’s sure thing: a rapid drama system for rehearsing and performing live robot theater. In: Advanced robotics and its social impacts (ARSO), 2014 IEEE Workshop on (pp 129–136). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zeng Z, Pantic M, Roisman G, Huang TS (2009) A survey of affect recognition methods: audio, visual, and spontaneous expressions. Pattern Anal Mach Intell IEEE Trans 31(1):39–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MACS, Heriot-Watt UniversityEdinburgh, ScotlandUK

Personalised recommendations