Comparative Analysis of AI Models in Constructing Tetris Gameplay

Context

The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to reshape various sectors, particularly in Natural Language Understanding (NLU) and Language Understanding (LU). As new models emerge, each boasting enhanced capabilities, developers face the challenge of selecting the most suitable option for their software deployment. The original post, “I Asked ChatGPT, Claude and DeepSeek to Build Tetris,” illustrates a practical evaluation of three prominent AI models—Claude Opus 4.5, GPT-5.2 Pro, and DeepSeek V3.2—by assessing their performance in generating a functional Tetris game. This analysis provides insights into the models’ strengths and weaknesses, offering critical information for developers seeking to balance cost and reliability in their AI applications.

Introduction

The primary goal of the original post is to compare the performance of leading AI models in generating a single, cohesive piece of software: a playable Tetris game. By doing so, the author aims to determine which model yields the best results in terms of first-attempt success, feature completeness, playability, and cost-effectiveness. For developers and NLU scientists, understanding the nuances of these models is essential for making informed decisions regarding AI implementation.

Main Goal and Achievement

The main goal articulated in the original post is to evaluate the feasibility of using advanced AI models for practical software development tasks. This evaluation is achieved through a structured approach that includes a clearly defined prompt, specific metrics for success, and a comparative analysis of the results produced by each model. By conducting this test, the author provides a practical framework for developers to gauge the effectiveness of different AI solutions in real-world applications.

Advantages of the Evaluated Models

• First Attempt Success: Claude Opus 4.5 demonstrated exceptional performance by generating a fully functional game on the first attempt, highlighting its reliability for developers needing quick solutions.
• Feature Completeness: The models were assessed for their ability to include all specified game mechanics and design elements, with Claude Opus 4.5 excelling in delivering a comprehensive solution that met the prompt’s requirements.
• Playability: User experience is critical in software development, and Claude Opus 4.5 provided a smooth and engaging gameplay experience, unlike the other models that had notable issues in this regard.
• Cost-Effectiveness: The analysis revealed significant cost disparities among the models, with DeepSeek V3.2 emerging as the most affordable option for developers willing to invest time in debugging, ultimately making it a viable choice for budget-conscious projects.

Limitations and Caveats

Despite the clear advantages, several caveats emerged from the evaluations. GPT-5.2 Pro, while theoretically superior, struggled to deliver a playable game on the first attempt due to layout bugs, raising questions about its practical application for routine coding tasks. Similarly, DeepSeek V3.2, though cost-effective, required multiple iterations to reach playability, which could lead to inefficiencies in time and resource allocation.

Future Implications

The ongoing advancements in AI, particularly in NLU and LU, suggest a promising trajectory for practical applications in software development. As models evolve, their capabilities will likely expand, offering even more refined tools for developers. However, the necessity for rigorous testing, as demonstrated in the original post, will remain crucial. Future models may incorporate enhanced debugging capabilities and improved user experience features, thus narrowing the gap between theoretical performance and practical usability. The insights gained from comparative evaluations will be invaluable as developers navigate the complex landscape of AI tools, ensuring they select the most suitable models for their specific needs.