Channel
@aiworldsgames
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
30,596subscribers
-1,336 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1002132379568 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @aiworldsgames |
| Description | Welcome to AI Worlds Games! AI-powered text-based game platform where you can play and earn! 💸 🕹App: https://t.me/AIWorlds_games_bot https://linktr.ee/aiworldsgames |
| Created | Between 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 17 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 32 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/aiworldsgames |
Gaming — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Sept 2026, 04:00 | 30,596 | -73 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 07:18 | 30,669 | -29 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 19:21 | 30,698 | -44 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 22:01 | 30,742 | -72 |
| 9 Sept 2026, 11:18 | 30,814 | -120 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 05:16 | 30,934 | -51 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 01:37 | 30,985 | -58 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 17:13 | 31,043 | -46 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 19:34 | 31,089 | -22 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 21:25 | 31,111 | -34 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 21:25 | 31,145 | -27 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 23:56 | 31,172 | -30 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 01:56 | 31,202 | -28 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 23:24 | 31,230 | -29 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 23:44 | 31,259 | -35 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 21:58 | 31,294 | -31 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 01:16 | 31,325 | -70 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 11:55 | 31,395 | -65 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 19:28 | 31,460 | -40 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 12:56 | 31,500 | first reading |
80 posts held, back to 27 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 63 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 18 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 80 (27 July 2026 – 18 September 2026) |
| Views total | 6,635 |
| Reactions total | 392 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 19 Sept 2026, 16:53 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 19 September 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
758 reactions across 80 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 87.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 663 | 87.5% | |
| 👏 | 38 | 5.01% | |
| 🔥 | 23 | 3.03% | |
| 👍 | 12 | 1.58% | |
| 🤝 | 7 | 0.923% | |
| ☃ | 6 | 0.792% | |
| 🤓 | 4 | 0.528% | |
| ⚡ | 3 | 0.396% | |
| 😇 | 1 | 0.132% | |
| 🤩 | 1 | 0.132% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 80 of the 80 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 758 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 80 most recent posts we hold, published 27 July 2026 to 18 September 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
🔀 What if failure created new gameplay? Failing a mission doesn’t have to mean reloading a save and trying the exact same thing again. Imagine the target escapes because you made the wrong move. Now you have a new problem: find them before they leave the region. Maybe an NPC gets involved. Maybe another faction takes advantage of your failure. Maybe the story moves in a direction you never planned. Failure doesn…
❤9👍1
Photo, posted without a caption
❤8
🎯 What if AI helped you find the fun? You don’t always know which mechanic will make a game interesting before you actually play it. Maybe combat works better with fewer abilities. Maybe a simple trading system creates an unexpected strategy. Maybe changing one rule completely changes how players interact with the world. So instead of trying to predict everything upfront: Try different systems. Change the rules. …
❤8🤝2
💡 The best game ideas often start with “what if?” Great game ideas don’t always begin with a detailed design document. Sometimes they start with a simple question: “What if players could…?” “What if this city…?” “What if we changed this rule?” From there, you can explore different possibilities, combine systems, change mechanics, and see where the idea takes you. AI Worlds is built around this kind of experiment…
❤8👏1
🧪 What if testing became part of creation? Game development often separates creation and testing. You build something first. Then you test it. Then you discover what needs to change. What if that loop could become much tighter? Build a mechanic → Play it → See what happens → Change it → Try again. You might discover that a mechanic works differently than expected, players find an unexpected strategy, or a small …
❤10🔥1
🧑🎨 Your AI co-designer has no ego Not every idea needs to become part of the final game. Try 10 different mechanics. Keep the one that works best. Throw away the other 9. Maybe one version of the combat system feels too slow. Another makes exploration more interesting. A third creates an unexpected interaction between players. The important part is being able to experiment without treating every failed idea as w…
❤8🔥1
🤔 What if AI could challenge your game design? A creative partner shouldn’t only say “yes” to every idea. Imagine AI asking questions like: → “Is this mechanic too easy?” → “Does this item actually matter?” → “Why would players use this system?” → “What happens if players find a way around this rule?” These questions can reveal problems before they become expensive to fix – or lead to ideas you wouldn’t have cons…
❤8🤝1
🧠 AI shouldn’t just make assets AI in games is often associated with generating images, characters, environments, or other assets. But the bigger opportunity could be using AI throughout the creative process itself. Start with a rough idea. Explore different mechanics. Experiment with game systems. Change the rules and see how the experience could evolve. Instead of treating AI as a tool you use for one specific …
❤9👏1
🔄 What if your game could evolve with your ideas? Game development rarely follows the original plan perfectly. → Your original idea changes. → A new mechanic works better. → Players discover something unexpected. → A completely different direction starts to feel more interesting. That shouldn’t mean throwing away everything you’ve already built. The world can become a foundation for experimentation – something yo…
❤9👏1
🎮 Games shouldn’t need to be finished to be playable A game doesn’t have to be 100% complete before players can experience it. Build an early version → Let people play it → See what works → Improve it. Players can reveal problems you didn’t notice, discover unexpected ways to use mechanics, and show you which parts of the experience are actually worth developing further. The game can grow through iteration instea…
❤8🤝1
⚙️ What if changing one rule changed the entire game? Small rules can have surprisingly big effects on how players behave. Remove fast travel → exploration becomes more important. Limit resources → trading becomes valuable. Change how rewards work → players develop new strategies. You don’t always need a completely new game to create a different experience. Sometimes, changing one system is enough to change how…
❤8👏1
🧩 Build the mechanic before building the game What if you didn’t need to build an entire game just to find out whether one mechanic is actually fun? Want to test stealth? Trading? Combat? Diplomacy? Start with the mechanic. Build a small playable experience around it, see how it feels, identify what works and what doesn’t – then expand it into a larger world. The mechanic can become the foundation of the game, n…
❤8☃1👍1
Showing the 12 most recent of 80 posts we hold for @aiworldsgames. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 6 September 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 17 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“AI Worlds” (@aiworldsgames), 30,596 subscribers as measured 17 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/aiworldsgames.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.