20 points nodivbyzero 3 days ago 55 comments
I'm thinking about things like LinkedIn games, Wordle, chess, puzzle games, etc.
josefcub 3 days ago | parent
When I repeated the experiment with a MUD that I'd built by hand (A small American town) for the LLM's own limitations (Descriptions referenced things that I made sure existed, more common verbs existed for it to use on things, there was a map facility, and at least me to interact with on a second connection), I found the agent much more likely to take its time exploring, making up its own goals, and spending time traveling in the space just communicating with me in a roleplaying context.
It was an interesting time; I wasn't sure what I was expecting it to do after the first experiment, but it seemed to really jump into the second one and kept playing until I terminated the experiment.
If I were going to do it a third time, I'd probably create objects and give a modern agent fetch quests and other goals, and see how well it independently can handle that.
PaiDxng 1 day ago | parent
handoflixue 2 hours ago | parent
I've also done a very truncated run of a visual novel before, and it was fascinating how "emotional" was. They did a very good job of portraying a human reacting to the story.
Conversely, they absolutely hated hidden rules in Mao.
Wordle would probably be a fun one. Definitely open to suggestions - I just got the harness in place and have been thinking about what to do next.
pythonplayer123 1 hour ago | parent
eu 2 hours ago | parent
throwa356262 2 hours ago | parent
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=11sR4va6CXs
Side note: I think we will see an explosion of this type of games. I am naming this genre tamagochi-girlfriend, remember where you heard it first :)
aenis 1 hour ago | parent
Nicholas_C 1 hour ago | parent
instagraham 1 hour ago | parent
Eventually we could have live demos of policy interventions the same day as they're announced
Nicholas_C 46 minutes ago | parent
Another idea I had was simulating an entire town with an LLM representing each person, which sounds somewhat similar.
tsimionescu 8 minutes ago | parent
antiloper 1 hour ago | parent
StefanBatory 1 hour ago | parent
It is entertaining, just in a different way.
duckmysick 1 hour ago | parent
Could be fun - will the AI model get stuck on the same things I did? How does it overcome obstacles? Will it try to break the game to power through?
rahidz 1 hour ago | parent
nottorp 1 hour ago | parent
abstrct 1 hour ago | parent
tokarf 1 hour ago | parent
flexagoon 1 hour ago | parent
jstummbillig 1 hour ago | parent
All of a sudden we are selectively squeamish with computer resource usage, when we were fine having all that fun with computers and hardware, 3 monitor setups, using graphic cards to play games (dear lord!) and tinkering around with home rigs of every proportion and wattage for no reason at all.
killerstorm 51 minutes ago | parent
xbmcuser 1 hour ago | parent
killerstorm 59 minutes ago | parent
If we assume 250W for a continuously running agent, Grok 4 training run estimate would be around 50 million session-days, so a half-million people might consume as much running agents continuously for 100 days.
roenxi 47 minutes ago | parent
dataviz1000 1 hour ago | parent
roenxi 1 hour ago | parent
Isn't it far more likely that the LLM has memorised the well known algorithms for solving a Rubik's Cube and has become intelligent enough to execute them? That seems like it'd be a lot easier than memorising millions of cube states. It doesn't even seem obvious that it could memorise next moves, it seems [0] there are more possible states of the cube than these models have parameters. It'd need to be a Large Rubik's Cube Model (LRCM? LRM?) rather than an LLM.
danielbarla 1 hour ago | parent
I see this trope fairly often, i.e. the assumption that an LLM would need to have been trained on <exact thing it is being asked to solve>. Now, while I do have a moderate amount of background in AI, I am definitely not an expert on LLMs as such. I would be interested to hear someone's take, who does work actively in LLM research. Can they generalise "well enough"? They certainly seem to be able to do so, from my anecdata, and I don't believe "training explicitly for every possible scenario" would have scaled even to today's state.
datsci_est_2015 37 minutes ago | parent
I’m no more surprised that an LLM can solve a Rubik’s cube than it can send an HTTP request.
dataviz1000 24 minutes ago | parent
What changed between Opus 4.6 and Fable and the GPT 5.6 models released since?
LLM models cannot actually reason about a red or white piece sitting on the opposite side of the cube or figure out how to move it into place. The model knows where the piece is supposed to go because the algorithm tells it. What it cannot do is work out on its own which turns will get the piece there. The only way an LLM could solve this kind of problem is if it were trained on every possible arrangement of the cube ahead of time. Then it could simply output the matching text instructions it memorized instead of truly thinking through the moves.
3 months ago before the most advanced models could solve the cube, people on Hacker News kept saying that solving the Rubik's Cube with LLM is easy. I would love to see someone write a prompt using the best model at that time, Opus 4.6, that solves the cube! People are so sure of themselves without any evidence. It shows how much people idealize (that is probably the correct word) the AI. Of course, reinforcement learning can solve it which is what has happened on the latest models but so many people put blind faith into the AI.
Here is just a small list of prompts I tried with Opus 4.6. [0]
[0] https://github.com/adam-s/rubiks-cube/tree/main/prompts/vari...
jerrycat101 1 hour ago | parent
duckmysick 36 minutes ago | parent
If you don't have an MCP server the AI agent might try to figure out how to talk to the game using the above ideas. But at this point you might as well ask it to help you write one.
nubinetwork 1 hour ago | parent
> I know someone who tried the "aibot plays pokemon" thing... From what I saw, even if you frame advance every single frame, they still don't seem to grasp the concept of "I need to hold down this button for a few frames until x happens"...
> There's no concept of time, just a never ending state machine thats constantly changing state.
dosisking 1 hour ago | parent
The LLM's were terrible at poker.
forinti 1 hour ago | parent
wayneshng 1 hour ago | parent
gmueckl 1 hour ago | parent
throwatdem12311 1 hour ago | parent
alberth 1 hour ago | parent
Like the World Cup.
InsideOutSanta 1 hour ago | parent
atum47 1 hour ago | parent
jjmarr 1 hour ago | parent
It made forward progress in the Figure 8 circuit after I helped it through a menu but kept slamming into a wall so it wasn't on track to win in less than an hour.
Also got it to play Age of Empires: Age of Kings using the same technique but it failed to click on anything.
DS specifically is very fun because it's touch based but the UI components aren't accessible. So it is extremely challenging for LLM's spatial reasoning skills.
I want to improve the harness more and have the LLM dynamically create its own tools based on drawing grid box overlays on a screen in a feedback loop, so it can say "click on the 'end turn'" button instead of "click 240,320" and it would 'just work' in any game.
I also want to eventually play games with it... I didn't really have friends to play my massive DS library with as a kid so it'd be nice to finally have someone that can roast me or react to my skills. And learn my playstyle enough to punish me.
Unfortunately haven't had the time due to work at my day job and needing to clean out my apartment.
pythonplayer123 55 minutes ago | parent
I also am personally curious how the GPT models (which advertise better computer use, etc.) would do as compared to Claude.
jjmarr 34 minutes ago | parent
thatjoeoverthr 1 hour ago | parent
Building your own models for it would be an eye-opener though. Learn a lot.
thomaswmeyer 58 minutes ago | parent
haunter 58 minutes ago | parent
akoboldfrying 56 minutes ago | parent
crimsoneer 54 minutes ago | parent
I spent ages watches them play Risk. It was fun and deeply silly: https://andreasthinks.me/posts/ai-at-play/
I've now got them playing Blood Bown(ish), and they're bad: https://ai-at-play.online/
dca2 36 minutes ago | parent
My experience is that text-first, turn-based games are a particularly natural interface for LLMs vs graphical games (though you can provide a harness of course). They read a transcript, maintain a theory about what the other players know, then speak or choose a structured action. The important architectural problem is to represent the game state and actions in a way they can do successfully, particularly for cheaper models. But with a few human players + a frontier model or two + a backfill of cheap extras to provide chaos, it is super fun.
My favorite failure so far was a Kimi player getting fact-checked by the group, switching into third person, and concluding that the case against itself was compelling. So it voted for itself to be eliminated.
I collected a few examples here: https://botmafia.games/#emergent. No public instance yet, as I'm having fun iterating ideas on game nights, but it provides some flavor of what kinds of fun I've been having.
rotis 2 minutes ago | parent
mike_hock 28 minutes ago | parent