Minesweeper Inside of Minesweeper Inside of Minesweeper Inside of...

Infinisweeper Part 1 - you know what Minesweeper needs? Recursion. That's the final ingredient needed to make a brain destroying game. Let's see if I can tackle this challenge without losing my mind.
Edited by: / benbenranger
#aliensrock #minesweeper #puzzle
New to the channel? These links will help:
VOD Channel: / @aliensrockarchive223
Discord: / discord
Twitch: / aliensrock
Twitter: / aliensrock50

[@syndere6755]

Infinitely large mines cause infinitely large explosions. You will be infinitely doomed upon a mistake.

[@Pablo360able]

*Everyone* will be infinitely doomed if you make a mistake, so at least we’ll all be in the same boat.

[@Blynded]

Minesweeper is great: as simple as it is, it can also become as complicated as it is

[@quasnoflaut7619]

I had a recurring nightmare when I was younger... of waking up in a massive tube, 20 ft round, where the walls and floor were made of this black and white tile. There were no lights but everything was illuminated a harsh bright white. And the tube went on forever. This game brought up that weird repressed 15 year old memory and for both that and the fact that it's a cool minesweeper game, 10/10 would recommend.

[@user_hat]

@@anteshell what

[@Fail-harold]

@@user_hat i kinda understand what they're saying, but also can't

[@gradypharr1300]

@@anteshell I think they meant the dream was recurring, not the shape.

[@ApostleOfCats]

@@anteshell are you trolling?

[@popa42]

@@anteshell The tube is infinitely long, and the nightmare kept showing up. Recurrent nightmare, tube going on forever

[@drxgqn]

As much as I love minesweeper, I don’t enjoy feeling intellectually inferior. The fact that you can do this crazy bs is insane.

[@casparbulyko3246]

It's like Understand all over again! 😆

[@lillylyantha6356]

I love watching him do it, it’s quite satisfying.

[@furrygaesex]

R/verysad

[@WanderTheNomad]

I prefer when Tyler understands a game better than I do. Because if I'm watching a let's play of a game that I understand more than the person I'm watching, I get a ton of facepalm moments, which is not enjoyable for me.

[@lillylyantha6356]

@@WanderTheNomad yea, that was his Celeste play through for me, love that game to death.

[@Bluemangrup]

I think the other Minesweeper you played was more sadistic while this was was just "check out how we can bend your mind!" (which is still really cool)

[@btf_flotsam478]

I know what you mean; the other ones felt like hard logic puzzles, while this one feels like an exercise in recursion (and, more specifically, the recursive-based puzzles).

[@matijamaksan4344]

My mind was bended. Goddamn it was funky.

[@Dr._Geno]

I don't know, I'm on level 14 of infinisweeper and the recursions have gotten so much worse, as in a recursion with mulitiple outer border recursions, and other wacky stuff.

[@oriontherealironman]

It will never cease to amaze me how FAST he can clear a minesweeper board 😅

[@nonipplenate]

Always a good day when Aliensrock uploads a new Minesweeper video Or a new Potioncraft Or any other series for that matter.

[@FelixakaJopokakafa]

Seems like you’re a man of culture

[@meapyboy12345]

True

[@meapyboy12345]

@@theendofthestart8179 well it used to be everyday but now since he is moving? (I think?) it is going to be once every 2 days for a month

[@richardrobles7000]

At this point, I would love see a throwback to Demon Crawl. Such a good game with nice sound design. Either way, I love the Minesweeper content!

[@axelolord]

Just started watching your vid, went and immediately played it. Took me 4 hours to finish and do not give up. It adds even more as time goes by. First it adds basically recursive PORTALS. Then at ~lvl14 it gets insane with no explanation to it with adding multiple hidden dimension planes. Just do mind there's MULTIPLE planes at that point you don't see at the same time and you can switch them by zooming in and out through the portal. So it's recursive iterations mixed with multiple dimensional planes all counting towards mine counts and my brain is now 6 times the size, I might need a doctor. Also: Freebird solo 10hour mix worked perfect to it too...

[@john_hatten2862]

You might like Patrick's parabox. He played it a while ago

[@desertsoftime]

I thought it was just that the first click couldn't be a mine in OG minesweeper? I could've sworn I've had plenty of games where my first click was a number.

[@doommaker4000]

The "no mine on first click" was actually added later. But you're mostly correct

[@youtubehandlesux]

It's only a thing from windows 7's minesweeper and up, In this game I only made sure that the first click isn't a mine

[@WanderTheNomad]

@@youtubehandlesux oh dang, I've seen game devs comment on Tyler's videos before, but this is the first time I've seen one that was already a fan of Tyler, or at least watched some of his videos before

[@fractalgem]

@@youtubehandlesux It's from before windows 7...at least if you select custom difficulty. I know because I cranked the mines up so high trying to find the safe sectors was like playing keno crossed with russian roulet, but the first click was always still not a mine.

[@youtubehandlesux]

@@WanderTheNomad I'm a kinda OG fan, was here since his poly bridge 1 videos, didn't comment much on the videos though

[@Natibe_]

Watching you play minesweeper is always a treat, but this probably isn’t ‘main series-worthy’. It would make excellent backdrop for channel updates though, a la late stage vampire survivors. It’s very visually hypnotizing to watch you blitz through recursive minesweeper.

[@WanderTheNomad]

Tyler's minesweeper and minesweeper-like games series never really last that long anyways

[@AceFuzzLord]

Just gonna say I prefer recursion in platforming based puzzles so much more. Still not skipping an Aliensrock video despite I'm not a big fan of the recursive minesweeper concept

[@corpserule1582]

You mentioned mid video that you wondered if there was an ideal starting square, so i gave it some thought. My mind instantly went to "squares that give the most information", which would be ones near the recursion edge, which have *more* squares than usual, but i quickly realised that it's the opposite. You want to go for a square in the middle of flat plane, because if you manage to hit a square with no adjacent mines (highest odds with least adjacencies), you get your information on far more squares and create an area of space that you can work with, as opposed to just finding a 6, which would just make you guess again.

[@andymiller6020]

I love watching these, I’m terrible at minesweeper and just stare with my mouth hanging open in awe half the time

[@swordzanderson5352]

Often times I get frustrated when you make decisions in games that have multiplicative factors such as roguelikes, but then I get absolutely amazed when you manage to pull off stunts like this without even thinking much about it. Being able to clear a minsweeper board WHILST casually talking means you don't even need that much focus to clear one.

[@kirbynom]

Gave this a try before watching. Quite enjoyable, but definitely unfortunate that it is not handmade puzzles as he expected, and not even guaranteed solvable. Got hit with a lot of click 2 mines, and even a 50/50 at the end of one puzzle.

[@hamthenoob3022]

minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of thank you tyler for constant daily uploads now

[@SupremeCalamitas789]

minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of minesweeper inside of mineswepper...

[@linnealee8904]

Me: Fibonacci spiral Aliensrock: macaroni elbow

[@itschoco8960]

really happy i found your channel! im a big puzzle game enjoyer and youve been introducing me to more!!! looking forward to seeing more from you :3

[@upsidedown-pug1974]

I can't wait see if there is like a freaking number 14 or something

[@alan2here]

It's possible to automatically test boards for solvability and regenerate if needed. Matrices are generally involved, but to simplify things imagine a system of equations with numbers where each row of the system is the sum of surrounding squares, so you end up needing an alphabet the size of the whole grid.

[@AnishMurthy1297]

I just picked the game up and PLEASE DO MORE!! The later puzzles introduce more really cool stuff than just recursion. And it makes my head hurt.

[@physicalnova2965]

That is such an interesting concept ! Thanks for sharing this, I really like how it kind of circumvent the rules of minesweeper while still being perfectly logical.

[@taechuK]

Holy shit yes, I didn't know I needed recursive Minesweeper until now.

[@SilverFoxeGames]

i can barely even look at the board properly, and tyler is somehow sweeping this like its nothing. he is amazing at puzzles

[@penguincute3564]

You might have been mistaken, all minesweeper boards NEVER start you on a zero… It just is a 19:1 ratio on getting a 0 (the 1 gets bigger and bigger, and the 19 gets smaller and smaller)

[@itioticginger9520]

Ahhhhh I love minesweeper but seeing recursion go so quickly hurts my head!

[@buttonasas]

The original minesweeper didn't have guaranteed zero revealed! It merely guaranteed a non-mine for first click.

[@pikminman13]

7:03 forget minesweeper this is nukesweeper now

[@leftysheppey]

This is wild, good work by the puzzle makers :)

[@MineBuoy]

Very cool concept! didn't knew about it

[@skeletonboxers7336]

The levels aren’t predetermined! Some levels have guaranteed safe cells when looking at the levels (I’ve edited the files to make my own, it doesn’t have a level editor but there is a how to in the files with the text tile) Because it’s open source though I’m hoping to pull request it soon and implement the guaranteed 0 first click like you mention. Otherwise it’s such a great version of minesweeper and I’m glad to see it played on KZbin !

[@tritoner1221]

recursion games and time travel games are the best!

[@Beateau]

I not sure what OG minesweeper you plated, but at least the one on Win 95, you could start with any number, from zero to 8.

[@BenBen-bb7bb]

He always makes me look forward to the end of the day to catch a new vid ❤️

[@bengiblin1480]

I love minesweeper and minesweeper variants. This one really gives me a headache though. 😅

[@Anastas1786]

"There's actually _a lot_ I can clear out right now." Every move you make clears out a _literally infinite_ amount of space, dude. Regarding the start; I'm not sure how generating maps like these would work, but maybe you'd have a bit more luck finding "zeros" by picking your first square from the "middle" of your chosen "layer" rather than an "edge"? That is, temporarily viewing each layer like a standalone shape and picking from the center of the "racetrack"/"L"/whatever rather than the inner or outer ones?

[@elmarhoppieland]

I think for the starting spot you want to take a spot with the fewest amount of adjacent cells. In the original minesweeper, that would be an edge and I think it mostly applies here too. Since edge cells are adjacent to bigger cells, there is less space for more cells. EDIT: Just want to say that this logic doesn't fully apply to minesweeper games that start with a 0, there is still optimal starting spots but they are different.

[@Felix-wq2ec]

Technically, in Minesweeper, you are the Minesweeper and you are sweeping minefields.

[@maxedoutsociety]

Great video to watch at midnight, hurts my brain.

[@aguyontheinternet8436]

Super cool, you get to solve an infinitely large puzzle, and then do it over and over.

[@jackyboi9828]

Room decoration idea: New Red Curtains

[@jayglenn837]

This was oddly soothing to watch

[@AnnnaKathryn]

Minesweeper isn't my favorite to watch but never stop making content that's interesting to you :) Thanks for the entertainment Tyler

[@GooeyGreen]

Loving the minesweeper content

[@maxencedc]

The equivalent of muscle memory in this context I think is called ‘’pattern recognition’’

[@dogbone10]

Can't wait for in 100 years when a Cyborg Clone of Aliensrock locks his consciousness in the Central Minesweeper Torture Nexus for all eternity.

[@annikahstebben4425]

This is minesweeper with the added layer of difficulty... Motion sickness

[@calebbaker7452]

This game looks awesome. Music is great too

[@Resursator]

Amazing idea, I'm impressed by the fact, that it works. The only thing I'm missing - fair algorithm, so you wouldn't need to guess, so every map would be always solvable, if you're patient enough to not make mistakes. I know, that the game is open source, but I'm not smart enough to do it. I can't understand, how it even works, lol

[@owencollier1071]

i feel like moving out to the side to zoom in should reveal a secret puzzle on a particular number

[@Reversinator]

I still stand by Tametsi being the most brutal Minesweeper game.

[@epicness2632]

Tyler, your proficiency at puzzle games scares me...

[@btf_flotsam478]

If I could make a Minesweeper game that was on the hyperbolic plane, I would; but all I can do now is put it down here and hope to get a shout-out from the person that combines straightforward Minesweeper programs with the hyperbolic stuff and take both of them to the next level simultaneously. Edit: Apparently, it already exists... well, here's to Tyler seeing this; I'll just try to find one that does aperiodic tessellations (pinwheel and other rep-tiles, kites-and-darts, and so on) as well as some other weird geometry (such as fractals).

[@Twentydragon]

6:00 - The original Minesweeper did not have you always start with a 0, but you were at least guaranteed not to hit a mine on your first click.

[@xleep712]

I want this game to finally add the infinimine: a tile next to INFINITE mines. Really neat concept.

[@Supersmile330]

Oooh, I need this game. There was a time when I played sooo much minesweeper but eventually got bored with it. This looks like it could be fun again

[@geeteevee7667]

Glad you’re getting back into the recursion stuff! Hopefully you’ll play Patrick’s Parabox again soon!

[@matthewspeck5467]

It was only a matter of time until Tyler found a recursive minesweeper game. Awesome vid tyler

[@rupert_1491]

welp, my brain are officially fried

[@kiwihyper6426]

Minesweeper is my second favourite series close to potion craft 👍

[@flyinhigh7681]

As a middling-proficient minesweeper Id love to see what kind of crazy logic puzzles can be had here, with tiles with less or more than 8 neighbours

[@krysmun]

This feels like that game inside a game inside a game game that you played a while back, the same kind of recursion that that game has. Either that or Patrick’s Parabox level of recursion. Both work.

[@JustAnotherCommenter]

This reminds me of Patrick's Parabox so much. Hopefully you can get back to playing more custom worlds in the future!

[@durgun8247]

The best starting tile when the first mine is a guaranteed zero is the one with the least amount of adjacent tiles because it lowers the chance of a mine being adjacent to the one you clicked, meaning you're more likely to reveal a larger space

[@vwoxy1]

There are 2 games called InfiniSweeper. This one, and and one with an infinite minefield.

[@BotSupportIronValiant]

What's crazier, the fact you can solve this, or the programming that went into it to make it work

[@YMandarin]

11:03 pattern recognition? I'd say thats the equivalent to muscle memory

[@Andrewwr]

Hah I need to try this on my channel!

[@brendangarrett7163]

Had to immediately hunt down and play this game, big minesweeper fan. And I agree about the muscle memory, it gets to the point where its about how fast your mind can do pattern recognition.

[@IAmQb]

I was thinking about implementing mineswwer on graphs for a while now (as in circles connected by lines, not as in a bar chart or something). This kinda gets my motivation for that up again because the recursive grids shown in this video could also be implemented on such a graph.

[@MagicGonads]

choosing an embedding/visualisation of that graph that makes sense to the player would be a challenge (considering the number of connections shown in some of the puzzles in this video)

[@MagicGonads]

you could represent minesweeper as a vertex colouring or as a weighted graph (AKA an edge colouring) in the vertex colouring vertices are either A or B, if B it's a mine, if A it's not (this is the most 'normalised' form of the graph) or you could also colour the vertices by a number that is the number of adjacent mines, but keeping this updated if you change the graph requires searching the graph (a 'denormalised' or 'cached' form of the graph). for a weighted graph you could weigh each edge with special values as to say if it's between a mine and a non-mine, or otherwise. this doesn't determine where the mines are but it does mean if the player chooses a vertex you can force this to be a non-mine and then generate the graph from there (maybe there are problems with this?). you could also have more values for the weights to represent an edge between two mines, or an edge between two non-mines, or a wildcard for any pairing, etc. or you could implement it many other ways but I'm trying to think of ones that don't add much extra structure compared to a traditional graph.

[@MagicGonads]

after some fiddling on my whiteboard I found a directed graph representation that has an interesting topology and simple properties of it allow you to calculate the number of adjacent mines without actually tracking the mines or this number. let's start with an undirected graph that gives us the underlying topology that we want to base our minesweeper on, and turn this into a directed graph where every edge in the original graph is bidirectional in our directed graph. we should suppose our original graph is connected since otherwise it would effectively have multiple separate minesweeper boards within it. this method will not work if we start with a general directed graph, but I'm not sure what that would even represent in terms of a usual understanding of minesweeper, in this case the normalised or cached way still works (and in either case is probably still the best computational choice). then let's decide some of the vertices are mines, there should be at least one mine and at least one non-mine. to make a vertex a mine, reduce its in-degree to 0. you could do this by looping over all the directed edges and removing those that end in a mine. or we could instead reduce the out-degree of mines to 0, which if we represented the graph as an adjacency list could be done by removing the mines from the indices of the list, but this will give us a topology with a different meaning. for either choice we could also decide to keep any mine to mine edges, so that if we permissively converted the directed graph to an undirected graph we would get the original graph, this would not reduce the respective degrees to 0 but the following formula will be unchanged since the mine to mine edges are bidirectional. once we have done this, for every vertex v we can define its 'mine count' as M(v) = deg+(v) - deg-(v) where deg+ is the in-degree, the number of edges directed into v, and deg- is the out-degree, the number of edges directed out of v (or if we chose to reduce the out-degree of mines instead of the in-degree, negate this formula so it is instead M(v) = deg-(v) - deg+(v)) for all non-mines this is actually the number of adjacent mines. an explanation is that for each directed edge between a mine and a non-mine, when we remove that edge that decreases the negative term of the mine count of the non-mine by 1, so it increases the mine count by 1, so if there were n mines adjacent to that non-mine, the mine count will be increased by n, and the mine count began at 0 because each edge began bidirectional, so the mine count is 0 + n which is n. if we try to use this same formula for mines it just gives us the negative number of adjacent non-mines, but minesweeper never needs to know anything about what's adjacent to a particular mine, so this is fine and we can even leave M undefined for mines. if we removed mine to mine edges we can use this to determine if a vertex is a mine, since if it is not isolated it will have a negative 'mine count' unless it is isolated in the new graph which case it must be a mine since every non-mine was not isolated in the original graph cannot be made isolated in the new graph (with isolated in a directed graph meaning having both 0 in-degree and 0 out-degree). so we could forget which vertices are a mine now and still be able to retrieve that information. but if we kept mine to mine edges then it is possible for a mine to have a 'mine count' of 0 but not be isolated, the same way it is possible for non-mines. this makes it harder to tell if non-isolated vertices are mines, we would have to search the connected component in the strictly converted undirected graph of our directed graph, since all the vertices in such a component will be the same type (mine vs non-mine), for any vertex that has a monodirectional edge in the directed graph, since one must exist as the original graph is connected and not all the same type, and the direction of that edge (based on our choice of which degree to reduce) determines the type. as for the topology, non-mines that are connected through the directed subgraph induced by only non-mines of the original undirected graph are also connected in this directed graph, if we decided to keep mine to mine edges then that also means connected mines in the only mine subgraph remain connected in the directed graph as well. if we removed mine to mine edges and reduced the in-degree of mines, then any path in this directed graph ends on a non-mine, so it represents all the ways to move that apart from your starting position avoids all mines, so it prevents you from moving from a non-mine to a mine, that keeps you 'safe' from mines. if we kept mine to mine edges and reduced the in-degree of mines, then each monodirectional edge always takes you from an island of mines to an island of non-mines, making non-mine vertex sets disconnected to any mines, keeping the 'safe' meaning. if we still removed mine to mine edges and reduced the out-degree of mines, then any path that visits a mine must end on that mine, that works well with the idea that the mines are deadly if encountered since you would be 'trapped' there. if we kept mine to mine edges and reduced the out-degree of mines, then each monodirectional edge always takes you from an island of non-mines to an island of mines, making mine vertex sets disconnected to any non-mines, keeping the 'trapped' meaning.

[@IAmQb]

@@MagicGonads Oh almost missed this. I started some implementation steps for it (nothing to show yet really). I decided to go with what amounts to vertex coloring for the representation of the graph in memory. The player will not just see X or O for mine or clear of course though, they will see the number of mines among the neighboring cells (/vertices) if the cell is uncovered. I will calculate that number on the fly. I plan to add some quirks later on like duplicate edges between vertices, weighted edges which affect the displayed mine count (so a duplicate edge would essentially be the same as weight 2), and directed edges which are all things a regular game of minesweeper usually doesn't have of course.

[@BoopyTheFox]

Sooner or later there will be a 9, a 10, an 11, and maybe an infinity mine

[@comicnimn]

There should be an "Am I done?" counter for this video

[@Dth091]

I think the "mental muscle memory" is called intuition!

[@soildarr598]

YESSSS FUEL MY MINESWEEPER ADDICTION!!!!

[@MilitantPacifista]

3:45 depends how you define infinite. If one box edge is length 1 and you can zoom out infinitely then yes If you define a screen edge as length one then the solved area is bounded.

[@CasualGraph]

this has been a funky torus

[@rawvegankid]

Dude, minesweeper could be anything, you could make a flipping painting that's a solvablr minesweeper

[@bobbob905]

A house tour would be cool

[@notrobloxburger]

Nice, the room is now roomier

[@WackoMcGoose]

So essentially, it's Patrick's Parabox but you explode if you do an oops.

[@brandynamite3022]

imagine being the dev that made this game

[@PotatoImaginator]

Cool Idea

[@Chillbirbo]

OH GOD MY HEAD HURTS

[@noodle71110]

as soon as you said free i paused the video, beat the first 8 then came back to watch some more

[@pandalion342]

Tyler's approach to minesweeper is the same approach I have for sudoku. except I'm nowhere near as good at sudoku.

[@deltav9784]

Now you have to play 4D Minesweeper.

[@annoyingdogx3]

He definitely clicked a mine at the beginning of the next level and cut it out

[@peterpeladon]

At this point you should have your own sadistic minesweeper game commissioned

[@princecuddle]

A random carpet on the floor helps drastically more then some may think. If you don't have one I recommend it.

[@Mottenprophet]

Speaking of Minesweeper games - i'd like to recommend Psycard by Ludosity (iOS & Android only, unfortunately). Small, short and charming game about psychic tournaments of competetive minesweeper-like card game with psi-powers and such

[@owenlarmon6488]

“The logical equivalent to muscle memory” yeah I think that’s just memory…

[@WanderTheNomad]

Pattern recognition to be more precise

[@kingonmax]

Man this reminds me number based fever dreams I used to get as a kid

[@PhilBushay]

my walls are gonna look real wavy after this video.

[@snugg1escat676]

Did you put a ladder in your room to minimize echo? Would make it feel more like home.

[@westarrr]

I'm very used to minesweeper, but this game made me a bit dizzy with the zooming and the recursion.

[@MetronaJ]

I think the psychological equivalent of muscle memory is just memory lol

[@blizzard8958]

This looks fucking sick

[@lilbitdun596]

yooo I had just finished watching minesweeper variations playlist, could've have come at a better time

[@sanderkvenild8947]

The logical equivalent of muscle memory, that would be pattern recognition. Your brain has done it before, so it can take shortcuts.

[@jordancambridge4106]

In 2019 I beat my previous record which was back in 2007. In 2007 I did the easy board in 3 to 4 seconds. In 2019 I successfully got all 10 mines in 2 seconds. In 2007 I did the medium in 13 seconds and the 100 mines in 1 minute and 47 seconds. I have a very good excuse why I did that in 2007. I got struck by lighting the day before and was moving a little faster than normal. In 2019 I was really happy that I was on the regular doing the easy in 4 to 6 seconds for over 500 games in a row and decided to push myself to the limit and then I passed out tired as hell with brain numb and hands in pain and happy I was successful with 2 seconds. I have not been able to get close to that sense. I am proud of myself but content with my personal record.