wangyz1999/GameplayQA

Dataset

GameplayQA: A Decision-Dense POV-Synced Multi-Video

7

32 commits

3 linked in READMEs

updated May 22, 2026

See the code

README

GameplayQA: A Decision-Dense POV-Synced Multi-Video
Understanding Benchmark of 3D Virtual Agents

University of Southern California
ACL 2026
Corresponding Author: yunzhewa@usc.edu


Framework

Overview

GameplayQA is the first benchmark for POV-Synced Multi-Video Understanding and Multi-Agent Video Understanding, built from ego-centric gameplay footage across 9 commercial 3D games. It features 2.4K multiple-choice questions spanning three levels of reasoning complexity β€” from single-clip action recognition to synchronized cross-video understanding.

Why synchronized multi-viewpoint reasoning matters

The ability to reason across multiple synchronized viewpoints is critical in many real-world domains: sports analytics leveraging multiple camera angles, autonomous driving requiring sensor fusion from surround cameras, law enforcement reviewing multiple dashcam feeds, and coordinated robot or drone fleets operating in shared environments. In esports and gaming, cross-POV synchronization and collective reasoning are fundamental to interpreting multi-agent collaboration β€” making gameplay an ideal controlled testbed for developing and evaluating these capabilities in video-language models.

Abstract
Multimodal LLMs are increasingly deployed as perceptual backbones for autonomous agents in 3D environments, from robotics to virtual worlds. These applications require agents to perceive rapid state changes, attribute actions to the correct entities, and reason about concurrent multi-agent behaviors from a first-person perspective β€” capabilities that existing benchmarks do not adequately evaluate. We introduce GameplayQA, a framework for evaluating agentic-centric perception and reasoning through video understanding. Specifically, we densely annotate multiplayer 3D gameplay videos at 1.22 labels/second, with time-synced, concurrent captions of states, actions, and events structured around a triadic system of Self, Other Agents, and the World β€” a natural decomposition for multi-agent environments. From these annotations, we generate 2.4K diagnostic QA pairs organized into three levels of cognitive complexity, accompanied by a structured distractor taxonomy that enables fine-grained analysis of where models hallucinate. Evaluation of frontier MLLMs reveals a substantial gap from human performance, with common failures in temporal and cross-video grounding, agent-role attribution, and handling the decision density of the game. We hope GameplayQA stimulates future research at the intersection of embodied AI, agentic perception, and world modeling.
9
Games
2.4 K
QA Pairs
2,709
Annotations
2,219 s
Annotated Footage
1.22 /s
Decision Density
15
Task Categories

Dataset Files

FileDescription
qa.csvMain benchmark β€” 2,365 questions across 9 games
qa_generalization.csvGeneralization benchmark β€” 213 questions on real-world non-game videos (load with config="generalization")

Raw annotation files and video clips are located in the annotation/ folder, organized by project batch (e.g. annotation/project-batch1/, annotation/project-multi-batch1/). Processed benchmark files ready for evaluation are provided as CSV files at the root level.

Download/Loading the Dataset

The QA metadata (CSV files) can be loaded directly via the HuggingFace datasets library:

from datasets import load_dataset

# Main benchmark (default)
ds = load_dataset("wangyz1999/GameplayQA")

# Generalization benchmark
ds = load_dataset("wangyz1999/GameplayQA", "generalization")

The raw video clips are stored under annotation/ and tracked with Git LFS. To download them, clone the full repository:

git lfs install
git clone https://huggingface.co/datasets/wangyz1999/GameplayQA

Each QA row contains video_start / video_end timestamps in seconds. Evaluation typically requires cropping the referenced clip to the relevant segment before passing it to a model.

Column Reference
ColumnTypeDescription
idstringUnique question ID (e.g. q-1767607156491-x4371a218)
instance_idstringVideo clip instance ID (e.g. i-052)
game_namestringGame title. One of: ApexLegends, ARCRaiders, Battlefield6, CounterStrike2, Cyberpunk2077, EldenRing, Minecraft, NoManSky, Valheim
video_1_file_name … video_5_file_namestring | nullPaths to the video clip(s) (under annotation/). Single-video questions populate only video_1_file_name; multi-video questions populate up to 5 columns.
video_indicesstring0-based index/indices of the video(s) used, comma-separated (e.g. 0 or 0,1,2)
video_startintStart time of the relevant video segment (seconds)
video_endintEnd time of the relevant video segment (seconds)
question_codestringFine-grained question type code (e.g. OA-IDENT, V1-SA2V2-SA-IDENT)
task_namestringHuman-readable task category derived from question_code. See Task Categories below.
question_levelintContext scope level: 1 = Single Reference, 2 = Temporal, 3 = Cross-Video
questionstringThe question text
correct_optionstringThe correct answer text
answer_startint | nullStart time of the answer evidence segment (seconds). Null for existence/binary questions.
answer_endint | nullEnd time of the answer evidence segment (seconds). Null for existence/binary questions.
distractor_1 … distractor_3string | nullWrong answer options (up to 3)
distractor_1_type … distractor_3_typestring | nullDistractor source. One of: lexical, temporal, role, scene, binary, count, order, intent, cross-video

Taxonomy

Entity Types: Self β€” Other β€” World

GameplayQA organizes perception in interactive 3D environments around a tripartite entity decomposition that mirrors how agents must reason in multi-agent settings.

Self-Other-World frameworkQuestion taxonomy
EntityCodeDescription
SelfSA / SSThe POV agent. Self-Action (SA) captures what the player does (shooting, reloading, jumping). Self-State (SS) captures the player's condition (health, ammo, equipped weapon).
OtherOA / OSExternal agents β€” teammates, enemies, NPCs. Other-Action (OA) and Other-State (OS) mirror the Self primitives for other autonomous entities.
WorldWO / WEThe shared environment. World-Object (WO) covers static or interactive elements (supply crates, vehicles, landmarks). World-Event (WE) covers dynamic occurrences (explosions, system notifications, environmental triggers).

Cognitive Levels

Questions are organized by the amount of temporal and cross-video context required:

LevelScopeWhat it tests
L1Single ReferenceBasic perception within a single video segment β€” recognizing what happened, what state something was in, or what object/event was present.
L2TemporalReasoning that requires grounding across time β€” linking entities across different moments, localizing when something happened, identifying absences, counting occurrences, ordering events, or inferring intent.
L3Cross-VideoReasoning across multiple synchronized POV videos β€” matching events across perspectives, ordering events across videos, or identifying which POV performed a given action.

Task Categories

Questions are organized into 15 task categories across 3 context scope levels (2,365 total questions).

ScopeTaskDescriptionExample Codes#QAvg Dur.
Single Reference (L1, 469)Action RecognitionIdentify or verify existence of self & others' actionsSA-IDENT, OA-EXIST, ...16210.0s
State RecognitionIdentify or verify existence of self & others' statesSS-IDENT, OS-EXIST, ...14710.1s
Object RecognitionIdentify or verify existence of world objects in sceneWO-IDENT, WO-EXIST709.3s
Event RecognitionIdentify world events occurring in the environmentWE-IDENT618.4s
Static Object CountCount static objects present in the sceneWO-COUNT2921.3s
Temporal (L2, 1383)Cross-Entity ReferringLink one entity to another (X2Y reasoning)SA2SS-IDENT, WO2SS-EXIST, ...42323.0s
Timestamp ReferringGiven time range [t1–t2], identify what entity existsTR2SS-IDENT, TR2SA-IDENT, ...8124.3s
Time LocalizationLocate exact timestamp when an event occurredSA-TIME, WE-TIME, ...28128.4s
Absence RecognitionIdentify actions/states that did not occur over a timespanSA-ABSENT, SS-ABSENT, ...19538.9s
Occurrence CountCount how many times an action/event happenedSA-COUNT, OA-COUNT, WE-COUNT7526.4s
OrderingDetermine temporal order sequence of actions/eventsSA-ORDER, OA-ORDER, MIX-ORDER18032.6s
Intent IdentificationIdentify underlying intent or goal behind actionsSA-INTENT, OA-INTENT14823.0s
Cross-Video (L3, 513)Sync-ReferringLink corresponding entities across synchronized videosV1-SA2-V2OA, V1-WO2-V2SS, ...20794.7s
Cross-Video OrderingDetermine event order sequence across multiple videosSA-ORDER-MV, MIX-ORDER-MV, ...117110.0s
POV IdentificationIdentify who performed what action in which videoSA-POV-ID, OA-POV-ID, ...18991.6s

Source Data

GameplayQA is built from first-person gameplay footage sourced from 9 commercially released multiplayer games spanning diverse genres:

  • Single-POV games: Minecraft, Apex Legends, No Man's Sky, Elden Ring, Cyberpunk 2077, Valheim
  • Multi-POV synchronized games: Counter-Strike 2, Battlefield 6, ARC Raiders

Videos were sourced from YouTube, Twitch streams, and existing datasets (Counter-Strike 2 footage from X-EGO-CS). For multi-POV games, groups of streamers who played together in the same match were identified and their individual recordings were manually time-aligned to construct temporally synchronized multi-video sets.

Question Generation

Questions are generated through a combinatorial template-based algorithm that systematically combines verified annotation labels across five orthogonal dimensions: number of videos (single/multi), context target (summative/timestamp/entity/cross-video referring), entity type (SA/SS/OA/OS/WO/WE), distractor type, and question form. The algorithm initially produces ~400K candidate QA pairs; strategic downsampling to 4K enforces balanced category coverage before quality assurance yields the final 2,365 gold-standard pairs.

Distractor Types
TypeDescription
lexicalText-based variants of the correct answer (synonyms, antonyms, attribute changes)
temporalEvents that did occur, but outside the queried time window
roleCorrect event but attributed to the wrong agent
scenePlausible events that never occurred in the video
cross-videoEvents from a different synchronized video perspective
binaryNegation of a binary (true/false) answer
countIncorrect quantity for counting questions
orderIncorrect temporal ordering of events
intentAlternative plausible motivations for an action

Quality Assurance

Language prior filtering: Each question is queried with text only (no video) using Gemini Flash with k=3 trials. Questions where the model consistently selects the correct answer without visual grounding are removed to prevent exploitation of statistical regularities in question phrasing.

Human evaluation: A stratified sample of 120 questions covering all question types was reviewed by annotators, who verified that (1) the video contains exactly one unambiguous correct answer, and (2) the question adheres to the semantics of its question code. Questions flagged as faulty (~8%) were corrected or removed.

Annotations

Annotation Process

Videos were annotated using dense multi-track timeline captioning via a custom-built annotation tool β€” sync-video-label. Each of the six entity types (SA, SS, OA, OS, WO, WE) is treated as an independent annotation track, and labels within and across tracks can overlap temporally to capture concurrent events.

The process follows a two-stage human-in-the-loop workflow:

  1. Stage 1 β€” AI-assisted generation + human verification: Gemini Pro generates candidate labels and distractors (3,632 predictions). Four graduate student annotators then verify and refine: 31.1% of predicted labels were deleted, 42.7% were edited (61.9% requiring caption changes, 42.2% requiring temporal boundary adjustments), and 7.6% of final labels were added manually.
  2. Stage 2 β€” Independent review: A separate annotator reviews all labels, making further adjustments to ~12% of labels.

A live read-only demo of the annotation interface is available at sync-video-label.vercel.app. See the demo video for a walkthrough.

Annotators

The annotation team consisted of 5 graduate students (ages 21–31). All annotators were experienced gamers: 60% play 3–5 times per week, 60% have 8+ years of gaming experience. Roles were distributed as 4 labelers and 2 evaluators, with one participant serving in both capacities for cross-stage consistency.

Label Statistics

A total of 2,709 true labels were annotated across 2,219 seconds of footage, yielding a decision density of ρ β‰ˆ 1.22 labels/second β€” roughly one decision-relevant event per second.

Label TypeCountShare
Self-Action (SA)65824.3%
Self-State (SS)72926.9%
Other-Action (OA)1605.9%
Other-State (OS)1907.0%
World-Event (WE)41715.4%
World-Object (WO)55520.5%
Total2,709100%
  • wangyz1999/X-EGO-CS β€” Cross-ego synchronized gameplay data from Counter-Strike 2, used as the source for the CounterStrike2 split in this benchmark.

Citation

If our research is helpful to you, please cite our paper:

@article{wang2026gameplayqa,
  title   = {GameplayQA: A Benchmarking Framework for Decision-Dense POV-Synced Multi-Video Understanding of 3D Virtual Agents},
  author  = {Wang, Yunzhe and Xu, Runhui and Zheng, Kexin and Zhang, Tianyi and Kogundi, Jayavibhav Niranjan and Hans, Soham and Ustun, Volkan},
  year    = {2026},
  eprint  = {2603.24329},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  primaryClass  = {cs.CL},
  url     = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24329}
}

benchmark
cross-video
ego-centric
esport
game
gameplay-understanding
multi-agent
multi-video
temporal-reasoning
video-question-answering
video-understanding

Contributors

wangyz1999

32 commits

wangyz1999/GameplayQA

Dataset

GameplayQA: A Decision-Dense POV-Synced Multi-Video

7

32 commits

3 linked in READMEs

updated May 22, 2026

See the code

README

GameplayQA: A Decision-Dense POV-Synced Multi-Video
Understanding Benchmark of 3D Virtual Agents

University of Southern California
ACL 2026
Corresponding Author: yunzhewa@usc.edu


Framework

Overview

GameplayQA is the first benchmark for POV-Synced Multi-Video Understanding and Multi-Agent Video Understanding, built from ego-centric gameplay footage across 9 commercial 3D games. It features 2.4K multiple-choice questions spanning three levels of reasoning complexity β€” from single-clip action recognition to synchronized cross-video understanding.

Why synchronized multi-viewpoint reasoning matters

The ability to reason across multiple synchronized viewpoints is critical in many real-world domains: sports analytics leveraging multiple camera angles, autonomous driving requiring sensor fusion from surround cameras, law enforcement reviewing multiple dashcam feeds, and coordinated robot or drone fleets operating in shared environments. In esports and gaming, cross-POV synchronization and collective reasoning are fundamental to interpreting multi-agent collaboration β€” making gameplay an ideal controlled testbed for developing and evaluating these capabilities in video-language models.

Abstract
Multimodal LLMs are increasingly deployed as perceptual backbones for autonomous agents in 3D environments, from robotics to virtual worlds. These applications require agents to perceive rapid state changes, attribute actions to the correct entities, and reason about concurrent multi-agent behaviors from a first-person perspective β€” capabilities that existing benchmarks do not adequately evaluate. We introduce GameplayQA, a framework for evaluating agentic-centric perception and reasoning through video understanding. Specifically, we densely annotate multiplayer 3D gameplay videos at 1.22 labels/second, with time-synced, concurrent captions of states, actions, and events structured around a triadic system of Self, Other Agents, and the World β€” a natural decomposition for multi-agent environments. From these annotations, we generate 2.4K diagnostic QA pairs organized into three levels of cognitive complexity, accompanied by a structured distractor taxonomy that enables fine-grained analysis of where models hallucinate. Evaluation of frontier MLLMs reveals a substantial gap from human performance, with common failures in temporal and cross-video grounding, agent-role attribution, and handling the decision density of the game. We hope GameplayQA stimulates future research at the intersection of embodied AI, agentic perception, and world modeling.
9
Games
2.4 K
QA Pairs
2,709
Annotations
2,219 s
Annotated Footage
1.22 /s
Decision Density
15
Task Categories

Dataset Files

FileDescription
qa.csvMain benchmark β€” 2,365 questions across 9 games
qa_generalization.csvGeneralization benchmark β€” 213 questions on real-world non-game videos (load with config="generalization")

Raw annotation files and video clips are located in the annotation/ folder, organized by project batch (e.g. annotation/project-batch1/, annotation/project-multi-batch1/). Processed benchmark files ready for evaluation are provided as CSV files at the root level.

Download/Loading the Dataset

The QA metadata (CSV files) can be loaded directly via the HuggingFace datasets library:

from datasets import load_dataset

# Main benchmark (default)
ds = load_dataset("wangyz1999/GameplayQA")

# Generalization benchmark
ds = load_dataset("wangyz1999/GameplayQA", "generalization")

The raw video clips are stored under annotation/ and tracked with Git LFS. To download them, clone the full repository:

git lfs install
git clone https://huggingface.co/datasets/wangyz1999/GameplayQA

Each QA row contains video_start / video_end timestamps in seconds. Evaluation typically requires cropping the referenced clip to the relevant segment before passing it to a model.

Column Reference
ColumnTypeDescription
idstringUnique question ID (e.g. q-1767607156491-x4371a218)
instance_idstringVideo clip instance ID (e.g. i-052)
game_namestringGame title. One of: ApexLegends, ARCRaiders, Battlefield6, CounterStrike2, Cyberpunk2077, EldenRing, Minecraft, NoManSky, Valheim
video_1_file_name … video_5_file_namestring | nullPaths to the video clip(s) (under annotation/). Single-video questions populate only video_1_file_name; multi-video questions populate up to 5 columns.
video_indicesstring0-based index/indices of the video(s) used, comma-separated (e.g. 0 or 0,1,2)
video_startintStart time of the relevant video segment (seconds)
video_endintEnd time of the relevant video segment (seconds)
question_codestringFine-grained question type code (e.g. OA-IDENT, V1-SA2V2-SA-IDENT)
task_namestringHuman-readable task category derived from question_code. See Task Categories below.
question_levelintContext scope level: 1 = Single Reference, 2 = Temporal, 3 = Cross-Video
questionstringThe question text
correct_optionstringThe correct answer text
answer_startint | nullStart time of the answer evidence segment (seconds). Null for existence/binary questions.
answer_endint | nullEnd time of the answer evidence segment (seconds). Null for existence/binary questions.
distractor_1 … distractor_3string | nullWrong answer options (up to 3)
distractor_1_type … distractor_3_typestring | nullDistractor source. One of: lexical, temporal, role, scene, binary, count, order, intent, cross-video

Taxonomy

Entity Types: Self β€” Other β€” World

GameplayQA organizes perception in interactive 3D environments around a tripartite entity decomposition that mirrors how agents must reason in multi-agent settings.

Self-Other-World frameworkQuestion taxonomy
EntityCodeDescription
SelfSA / SSThe POV agent. Self-Action (SA) captures what the player does (shooting, reloading, jumping). Self-State (SS) captures the player's condition (health, ammo, equipped weapon).
OtherOA / OSExternal agents β€” teammates, enemies, NPCs. Other-Action (OA) and Other-State (OS) mirror the Self primitives for other autonomous entities.
WorldWO / WEThe shared environment. World-Object (WO) covers static or interactive elements (supply crates, vehicles, landmarks). World-Event (WE) covers dynamic occurrences (explosions, system notifications, environmental triggers).

Cognitive Levels

Questions are organized by the amount of temporal and cross-video context required:

LevelScopeWhat it tests
L1Single ReferenceBasic perception within a single video segment β€” recognizing what happened, what state something was in, or what object/event was present.
L2TemporalReasoning that requires grounding across time β€” linking entities across different moments, localizing when something happened, identifying absences, counting occurrences, ordering events, or inferring intent.
L3Cross-VideoReasoning across multiple synchronized POV videos β€” matching events across perspectives, ordering events across videos, or identifying which POV performed a given action.

Task Categories

Questions are organized into 15 task categories across 3 context scope levels (2,365 total questions).

ScopeTaskDescriptionExample Codes#QAvg Dur.
Single Reference (L1, 469)Action RecognitionIdentify or verify existence of self & others' actionsSA-IDENT, OA-EXIST, ...16210.0s
State RecognitionIdentify or verify existence of self & others' statesSS-IDENT, OS-EXIST, ...14710.1s
Object RecognitionIdentify or verify existence of world objects in sceneWO-IDENT, WO-EXIST709.3s
Event RecognitionIdentify world events occurring in the environmentWE-IDENT618.4s
Static Object CountCount static objects present in the sceneWO-COUNT2921.3s
Temporal (L2, 1383)Cross-Entity ReferringLink one entity to another (X2Y reasoning)SA2SS-IDENT, WO2SS-EXIST, ...42323.0s
Timestamp ReferringGiven time range [t1–t2], identify what entity existsTR2SS-IDENT, TR2SA-IDENT, ...8124.3s
Time LocalizationLocate exact timestamp when an event occurredSA-TIME, WE-TIME, ...28128.4s
Absence RecognitionIdentify actions/states that did not occur over a timespanSA-ABSENT, SS-ABSENT, ...19538.9s
Occurrence CountCount how many times an action/event happenedSA-COUNT, OA-COUNT, WE-COUNT7526.4s
OrderingDetermine temporal order sequence of actions/eventsSA-ORDER, OA-ORDER, MIX-ORDER18032.6s
Intent IdentificationIdentify underlying intent or goal behind actionsSA-INTENT, OA-INTENT14823.0s
Cross-Video (L3, 513)Sync-ReferringLink corresponding entities across synchronized videosV1-SA2-V2OA, V1-WO2-V2SS, ...20794.7s
Cross-Video OrderingDetermine event order sequence across multiple videosSA-ORDER-MV, MIX-ORDER-MV, ...117110.0s
POV IdentificationIdentify who performed what action in which videoSA-POV-ID, OA-POV-ID, ...18991.6s

Source Data

GameplayQA is built from first-person gameplay footage sourced from 9 commercially released multiplayer games spanning diverse genres:

  • Single-POV games: Minecraft, Apex Legends, No Man's Sky, Elden Ring, Cyberpunk 2077, Valheim
  • Multi-POV synchronized games: Counter-Strike 2, Battlefield 6, ARC Raiders

Videos were sourced from YouTube, Twitch streams, and existing datasets (Counter-Strike 2 footage from X-EGO-CS). For multi-POV games, groups of streamers who played together in the same match were identified and their individual recordings were manually time-aligned to construct temporally synchronized multi-video sets.

Question Generation

Questions are generated through a combinatorial template-based algorithm that systematically combines verified annotation labels across five orthogonal dimensions: number of videos (single/multi), context target (summative/timestamp/entity/cross-video referring), entity type (SA/SS/OA/OS/WO/WE), distractor type, and question form. The algorithm initially produces ~400K candidate QA pairs; strategic downsampling to 4K enforces balanced category coverage before quality assurance yields the final 2,365 gold-standard pairs.

Distractor Types
TypeDescription
lexicalText-based variants of the correct answer (synonyms, antonyms, attribute changes)
temporalEvents that did occur, but outside the queried time window
roleCorrect event but attributed to the wrong agent
scenePlausible events that never occurred in the video
cross-videoEvents from a different synchronized video perspective
binaryNegation of a binary (true/false) answer
countIncorrect quantity for counting questions
orderIncorrect temporal ordering of events
intentAlternative plausible motivations for an action

Quality Assurance

Language prior filtering: Each question is queried with text only (no video) using Gemini Flash with k=3 trials. Questions where the model consistently selects the correct answer without visual grounding are removed to prevent exploitation of statistical regularities in question phrasing.

Human evaluation: A stratified sample of 120 questions covering all question types was reviewed by annotators, who verified that (1) the video contains exactly one unambiguous correct answer, and (2) the question adheres to the semantics of its question code. Questions flagged as faulty (~8%) were corrected or removed.

Annotations

Annotation Process

Videos were annotated using dense multi-track timeline captioning via a custom-built annotation tool β€” sync-video-label. Each of the six entity types (SA, SS, OA, OS, WO, WE) is treated as an independent annotation track, and labels within and across tracks can overlap temporally to capture concurrent events.

The process follows a two-stage human-in-the-loop workflow:

  1. Stage 1 β€” AI-assisted generation + human verification: Gemini Pro generates candidate labels and distractors (3,632 predictions). Four graduate student annotators then verify and refine: 31.1% of predicted labels were deleted, 42.7% were edited (61.9% requiring caption changes, 42.2% requiring temporal boundary adjustments), and 7.6% of final labels were added manually.
  2. Stage 2 β€” Independent review: A separate annotator reviews all labels, making further adjustments to ~12% of labels.

A live read-only demo of the annotation interface is available at sync-video-label.vercel.app. See the demo video for a walkthrough.

Annotators

The annotation team consisted of 5 graduate students (ages 21–31). All annotators were experienced gamers: 60% play 3–5 times per week, 60% have 8+ years of gaming experience. Roles were distributed as 4 labelers and 2 evaluators, with one participant serving in both capacities for cross-stage consistency.

Label Statistics

A total of 2,709 true labels were annotated across 2,219 seconds of footage, yielding a decision density of ρ β‰ˆ 1.22 labels/second β€” roughly one decision-relevant event per second.

Label TypeCountShare
Self-Action (SA)65824.3%
Self-State (SS)72926.9%
Other-Action (OA)1605.9%
Other-State (OS)1907.0%
World-Event (WE)41715.4%
World-Object (WO)55520.5%
Total2,709100%
  • wangyz1999/X-EGO-CS β€” Cross-ego synchronized gameplay data from Counter-Strike 2, used as the source for the CounterStrike2 split in this benchmark.

Citation

If our research is helpful to you, please cite our paper:

@article{wang2026gameplayqa,
  title   = {GameplayQA: A Benchmarking Framework for Decision-Dense POV-Synced Multi-Video Understanding of 3D Virtual Agents},
  author  = {Wang, Yunzhe and Xu, Runhui and Zheng, Kexin and Zhang, Tianyi and Kogundi, Jayavibhav Niranjan and Hans, Soham and Ustun, Volkan},
  year    = {2026},
  eprint  = {2603.24329},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  primaryClass  = {cs.CL},
  url     = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24329}
}

benchmark
cross-video
ego-centric
esport
game
gameplay-understanding
multi-agent
multi-video
temporal-reasoning
video-question-answering
video-understanding

Contributors

wangyz1999

32 commits