Generating a game is not the same as making one playable. Existing code-generation approaches often translate a prompt directly into an artifact, leaving interaction-level failures undetected. We argue that game generation requires a player and study two roles for graphical user interface (GUI) agents. First, we introduce \textbf{PlaytestArena}, an evaluation environment containing 200 browser-based game-generation tasks across eight genres, each paired with rubrics of expected in-play behaviors. An independent GUI judge loads and plays each build to adjudicate these rubrics. Second, we propose \textbf{Play2Code}, in which a game agent and a rubric-blind GUI playtester iteratively generate, play, and refine games through shared memory. The playtester provides gameplay traces and actionable feedback, while a separate GPT-5.5 judge assigns final benchmark scores. Across three frontier backbones, Play2Code achieves a 66.8\% rubric pass rate, outperforming single-pass and agentic-coding baselines by 37.1 and 14.6 points, respectively. Its scores also improve monotonically across refinement rounds. Further analysis shows that GUI-agent feedback is fully logged and traceable, while its priorities vary substantially across model backbones. These results establish GUI playtesting as an evaluation and refinement signal for interactive code generation. Our project website is available at https://continual-game-generation.vercel.app/
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.
Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al.· Neural Information Processin...· 316 citations· ⚡15
Known for his clear and elegant writing style, Bertsekas shaped fields from control and optimization to large-scale computation and artificial intelligence.
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.