Tic tac toe has a solved problem: on a 3×3 grid, perfect play from both sides always ends in a draw. Every experienced player knows this. So when we briefed Neon Tic Tac Toe, the question wasn't really "can AI build this?" — it was "what would make this worth playing?"

The AI's answer was configurability. Not a different game — the same game, extended in dimensions that change its character. Player counts from one to four. Variable board sizes. A win length you set yourself. The standard game is still there. It's just one configuration among several.

The Core Implementation: Generic Board Logic

The first design decision the AI made was to implement the board as a generic rows-by-columns grid rather than a hardcoded 3×3. This is a small architectural choice that has large consequences: a generic board means board size is a parameter, not a constant. Changing it doesn't require rewriting logic — you drag the row and column sliders, anywhere from 3 to 10 each, and the board reconfigures.

Win detection also works generically. The winning condition check scans every row, column, and diagonal for N-in-a-row — but N is a win-length setting of its own, not the board size. On the Classic 3×3, that means 3-in-a-row. Stretch the board to 5×5 and it is still 3-in-a-row until you raise the win slider, which goes as high as the shorter of the two dimensions. This means adding larger boards required no changes to win detection — the logic already handled them.

The Three AI Difficulty Levels

Three AI difficulty settings ship with the game: Easy, Medium, and Hard. They work differently, and the distinction matters on larger boards:

Easy plays randomly — it picks from available moves without any strategic evaluation. Against Easy, you can always win by playing a straightforward strategy. It's designed for players new to the game or younger players who don't need a competitive opponent yet.

Medium uses a basic heuristic: it checks whether you're about to win and blocks you, and it checks whether it can win immediately and takes that move. It won't set up multi-step traps, but it won't let you score an obvious win either. Most casual players will find Medium a reasonable opponent.

Hard adds exactly one rule to Medium: if it can't win and doesn't have to block, it takes the centre square. That's the whole difference. There is no search — a full minimax would be hopeless on a 10×10 board, so Hard is a three-check heuristic that falls through to a random square when none of the checks fires.

The honest consequence is that Hard is beatable, and it gets more beatable as the board grows. Because it only ever answers the threat directly in front of it, a position with two threats at once — a fork — leaves it with nothing to say, and a 5×5 gives you far more room to build one than a 3×3 does. Hard is a competent opponent for a casual game, not a solver.

Three-Player Mode and the Design Problem It Creates

Three-player tic tac toe was in the initial output as an option alongside two-player. We almost removed it as a feature that seemed unlikely to get much use — who plays tic tac toe three at a time? We kept it after testing, because it turned out to fundamentally change the game's dynamics rather than just adding a third participant. The shipped setup screen goes to four: X, O, a star, and a triangle.

In two-player, the game is symmetrically adversarial: you want to win, your opponent wants to prevent that. In three-player, alliances form tacitly. Player C might block Player A not because it advances C's position, but because allowing A to win is worse than a stalemate that gives B or C a chance. Players have to track two opponents simultaneously — and the player who wins is often the one who correctly identified which opponent to prioritize blocking.

This emergent behavior works best on larger boards. On a 3×3, three-player games tend to end quickly in draws because the grid fills before anyone establishes a winning line. On 4×4 or 5×5, there's enough space for strategy to develop across multiple turns.

Neon Visual System

The visual design was specified as "neon aesthetic" — the same direction as most of the Vibe Arcade collection. What the AI built was a per-player color system: each player gets a distinct neon color that's consistent across their marks, the glow effects on their winning line, and any UI indicators showing whose turn it is.

The color assignments are fixed in a sequence but the four-color palette — cyan, magenta, green, yellow — creates strong visual differentiation in multiplayer — you can always tell at a glance which marks belong to which player. The winning line animation (a neon glow pulse along the winning cells) uses each player's assigned color, so the win screen communicates the winner visually without needing to read text.

What Tic Tac Toe Taught Us About Breadth vs. Depth

Most of our games added depth to a simple concept: Neon Snake got a mission system, Sushi Ninja got recipes. Neon Tic Tac Toe added breadth — more configurations of the same rules rather than more rules. The result is a game that serves different audiences depending on settings rather than serving one audience very well.

A parent playing with a young child uses Easy and 3×3. Two competitive adults use Hard and 5×5. Three people at a party use the three-player mode on whatever board size they choose. The mechanics haven't changed for any of these players — only the configuration has. Breadth rather than depth turned a solved game into something that holds up across multiple use cases.

Related: Free Online Tic Tac Toe Guide · How We Built Neon Snake With AI · Vibe Coding Tools: From Chatbots to AI IDEs