Playing With AI: How Do State-Of-The-Art Large Language Models Perform in the 1977 Text-Based Adventure Game Zork?
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
Abstract (arXiv)
In this positioning paper, we evaluate the problem-solving and reasoning capabilities of contemporary Large Language Models (LLMs) through their performance in Zork, the seminal text-based adventure game first released in 1977. The game's dialogue-based structure provides a controlled environment for assessing how LLM-based chatbots interpret natural language descriptions and generate appropriate action sequences to succeed in the game. We test the performance of leading proprietary models - ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini - under both minimal and detailed instructions, measuring game progress through achieved scores as the primary metric. Our results reveal that all tested models achieve less than 10% completion on average, with even the best-performing model (Claude Opus 4.5) reaching only approximately 75 out of 350 possible points. Notably, providing detailed game instructions offers no improvement, nor does enabling ''extended thinking''. Qualitative analysis of the models' reasoning processes reveals fundamental limitations: repeated unsuccessful actions suggesting an inability to reflect on one's own thinking, inconsistent persistence of strategies, and failure to learn from previous attempts despite access to conversation history. These findings suggest substantial limitations in current LLMs' metacognitive abilities and problem-solving capabilities within the domain of text-based games, raising questions about the nature and extent of their reasoning capabilities.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 15 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Jan 2026.
Builds on
15 of 38 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 14
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,383
- 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,155
- 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
- 2018TextWorld: A Learning Environment for Text-based Gamescited by 304
- 2023Do Large Language Models Know What They Don't Know?cited by 238
2 more
- 2018Playing Text-Adventure Games with Graph-Based Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 53
- 2021Why AI is Harder Than We Thinkcited by 40
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024A Survey on Large Language Model-Based Game Agents
- 2023Can Large Language Models Play Text Games Well? Current State-of-the-Art and Open Questions
- 2024clembench-2024: A Challenging, Dynamic, Complementary, Multilingual Benchmark and Underlying Flexible Framework for LLMs as Multi-Action Agents
- 2026Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models. Lessons Learned from General Game Playing
- 2025GVGAI-LLM: Evaluating Large Language Model Agents with Infinite Games
- 2021Modeling Worlds in Text
- 2026Nemobot Games: Crafting Strategic AI Gaming Agents for Interactive Learning with Large Language Models
- 2025Playing games with Large language models: Randomness and strategy