A nightmarishly hard AI safety strategy game about holding p(Doom) down. You can't win; you can only buy time.
A nightmarishly hard AI safety strategy game about holding p(Doom) down. You can't win; you can only buy time.
Project Details
Updated 08/10/26 · By grantmaking.aiProject summary
p(Doom)1 is a nightmarishly hard, weird side project where players attempt to battle an inexorable rise in, you guessed it, p(Doom). I took the advice 'write what you know' literally.
The game is about the challenge facing real AI safety researchers, grantmakers and philanthropists, wrapped up in a way that hopefully communicates the challenge while mitigating the actual despair. You can't win; you can only buy time. There's no victory condition. Your score is how long you hold P(Doom) back before a run ends.
I started designing it out of a confluence of my interests (game design), gaming background (Magic: the Gathering, PoE, Tarkov, Civ, X:COM, sim games), professional background (project management specialising in governance), and career (operations work in Global Catastrophic Risks).
The early friends-and-family alpha is out at pdoom1.com. It's getting patched daily currently, and will move to a weekly cycle as of Friday 31 July.
What are this project's goals? How will you achieve them?
- Get the game in front of more eyeballs by improving quality of UX, UI, and infrastructure.
- Turn that into community engagement at a higher level of background technical understanding -- people learning a bit more about AI safety as a side effect of an engagingly hard game, the same way Young_Me learned a bit about history by playing Civilization.
- Underneath it is, I suppose, my real theory of change: people voluntarily adopting good actions generates the space for better actions to come about. Small and middle-power players affect things through norm- and market-setting. This feels like a step in that direction.
- Secret goal: watch people argue about how p(Doom) is calculated.
How will this funding be used?
- Fund development so I can continue to justify spending some of my time on the game.
- Pay a developer to take over leading some elements of gameplay.
- Pay human artists to uplift and steer the artistic direction. I'm using purely AI generated assets right now and would like to be paying artists instead.
- Pay for assets and hosting.
- Support any community that emerges out of people enjoying the game.
- Maintain and update the open historical AI-safety dataset the game runs on. It lives in a standalone public repo, is broadly useful to researchers, journalists and developers, and is designed to be available for other people's games and tools to draw from -- with maintenance and update schedules built into the dev cycle.
Who is on your team? What's your track record on similar projects?
Me, presently. I designed a board game about Rugrats trivia when I was 8 -- my brother and I enjoyed playing it, though my parents sucked at answering the tricky questions.
I played, then judged, then did coverage for Magic: the Gathering, and during that time interviewed hundreds of players, many pro-level, who went on to lead and design games themselves. Many had opinions. We talked a lot about game design and balance, and getting a good understanding of what makes depth and complexity work across rulesets.
Professionally I do operations work in Global Catastrophic Risks with a governance-focused project-management background. I know the pains I am inflicting on players.
What are the most likely causes and outcomes if this project fails?
- People might take AI safety less seriously due to this game being low-status or failing in reputationally damaging ways.
- People might see this and be discouraged from making a better game.
- The game might contribute to ideas that are dangerous, disparaging or discouraging of good actions, like giving a false impression that some capabilities are maintainable or that we can swerve into safety effort later, rather than taking actions NOW.
-I've designed against that last one deliberately: the game is explicit that we're not saying or implying labs really do the truly weird stuff that takes place later in play, and the underlying dataset stays strictly factual and is not predictive. Hopefully this also lessens the likelihood of someone lawyering me.
How much money have you raised in the last 12 months, and from where?
None. I have put in a fair amount of my own time over the last year and a few grand of my own savings into it until now.
People
Updated 08/10/26 · By grantmaking.aicreator
Funding Details
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- $48,000
- -
- -
Making a small donation as a sign of support; I continue to be excited for games as a method of imparting interesting lessons (eg universal paperclips, maybe Manifold). Pip also has a good track record of supporting work in the xrisk space, through Ashgro and now https://beacongcr.org/
I wasn't actually able to demo the game myself -- I'm on Mac, Sequoia 15.5, and "right click => open" only gave me "cancel" and "move to trash" as options. (Vaguely I think that I've solved this problem before for other apps, but it was enough of a roadblock for me to give up). I'd encourage Pip to see if Godot or Claude can port at least a demo, to be directly playable on web/mobile.
I'd also worry that the game currently looks a little bit too AI-generated and/or chaotic, per the screenshots. I'm generally a fan of AI assistance, but specifically the gaming community has a strong immune reaction against AI content, and also in this case I'd worry there's just too much slop all around. Possibly pairing with a good visual/graphic designer might be quite helpful, since games especially seem to have high standards/stakes for visual appeal to be successful.
@Austin Thanks!
I am developing on PC and have only been able to test on one Mac build so far, but I'll work on making that more robust. I also need to go pay for some certificates to make it easier for people to get the game up and running.
I am probably culturally biased against mobile games so that is definitely a blindspot of mine, noted!
Noted on the AI generation and visual chaos / cluttering. I've held off on the UX and UI as long as I can in the dev cycle deliberately, because I can iterate much faster through game engines than quality art, and that's where my main budget expenses will mostly emerge. Consider the visual assets very much placeholders and proof-of-concepts for now and they will iterate rapidly, then start to stabilise as I settle on art direction and start getting real assets designed.
I'll be uploading more content to the website over the next few days as well for anyone who's interested in more of the backend. LLM's scanning the repo on github should be able to summarise what's going on reasonably well.