Tetris · mimo-v2.6-pro

Let me build the game. Single file index.html.

Key requirements:
- 10x20 board
- 7 tetrominoes, legal spawn positions
- Controls: Left/Right move, Up rotate CW, Down soft drop, Space hard drop. Show controls.
- Reject invalid moves/rotations.
- Lock landed pieces, clear rows, move rows above down, spawn next.
- Display score, lines, level, next preview.
- Scoring 100/300/500/800 * level.
- Level 1 start, gravity speed increases every 10 lines.
- Game Over on blocked spawn. Pause/Resume, Restart resetting board, score, level, piece sequence state (bag reset with fresh random? "piece sequence state" — reset the bag/seed).
- Hold and ghost optional — I'll add ghost (easy) and maybe hold.

Also I should make it testable via browser tools. Let me write clean code with some exposed state maybe for verification (window.game or similar) — helpful for the browser inspect.

Let me write it.

Board: 20 visible rows. Maybe add hidden buffer rows? Simpler: 20 rows only, spawn at top. Spawn positions: standard-ish. I'll use a simple approach: pieces defined in matrix form, spawn with x centered, y = 0 (or -1 for pieces with empty first row — but with matrix definitions, spawn y=0 is fine as long as within board).

Actually to avoid pieces being cut off at top, spawn y=0 with matrix rows trimmed. E.g., I piece: [[0,0,0,0],[1,1,1,1],[0,0,0,0],[0,0,0,0]] — spawn y=0 means the filled row is at row 1. Fine.

Rotation: rotate matrix NxN CW. Check collision; if collide, reject (no kicks needed since optional).

Gravity: interval based on level: e.g., Math.max(80, 800 - (level-1)*80) ms. Level = floor(lines/10)+1.

Soft drop: move down one, maybe +1 point? Not required; keep simple (no score for soft drop, or add small). I'll not award to keep scoring spec exact... Actually spec says award 100/300/500/800 for clears. Soft drop points could confuse verification. Keep no soft drop points.

Hard drop: move down until collision, lock immediately.

Lock: maybe lock delay — simple: when piece can't move down, lock immediately (on gravity tick or after move fails). Simpler and reliable: lock immediately when downward movement fails at gravity tick or soft drop. But then rotation at bottom could be impossible... fine.

Actually better standard: lock when gravity tick can't move down. But hard drop locks immediately. Soft drop that can't move down → also lock? Let's do: if soft drop fails, lock. That makes testing easier.

Hmm, but "Lock landed pieces" — fine.

Game loop with requestAnimationFrame and delta accumulation.

Next preview: show next piece (one piece) canvas. Bag: 7-bag randomizer. Restart resets bag with new shuffle.

Game over: overlay with message, Restart button.

Pause/Resume button + P key.

Responsive layout, nice styling, canvas drawn with cells and grid.

Also expose window.__tetris = { board, piece, score, ... } for inspection. Or just inspect DOM values. I'll expose a debug object anyway.

Let me write the file.

Canvas sizing: cell 30px → 300x600 board. Next preview 120x120.

Keyboard handling: prevent default for arrows/space.

Also touch buttons? Not required. Skip, but maybe add on-screen buttons for mobile — optional, skip for time.

Draw: draw grid lines, locked cells with colors, ghost piece (outline), active piece.

Colors per tetromino.

Row clear animation: skip for simplicity (or brief flash). Skip.

Let me write code carefully.

State:
```
const COLS=10, ROWS=20, CELL=30;
let board = createBoard(); // ROWS x COLS of null/color
let current = null; // {type, matrix, x, y, color}
let nextType = null;
let bag = [];
let score=0, lines=0, level=1, gameOver=false, paused=false;
```

Piece definitions with rotation via matrix rotation of base matrix.

SRS-ish spawn: use matrices:
I: 4x4 with row1 filled
J: 3x3 [[1,0,0],[1,1,1],[0,0,0]]
L: 3x3 [[0,0,1],[1,1,1],[0,0,0]]
O: 2x2 [[1,1],[1,1]]
S: 3x3 [[0,1,1],[1,1,0],[0,0,0]]
T: 3x3 [[0,1,0],[1,1,1],[0,0,0]]
Z: 3x3 [[1,1,0],[0,1,1],[0,0,0]]

Spawn x = Math.floor((COLS - matrix[0].length)/2), y=0.

Collision check: for each filled cell at (x+col, y+row): if x<0 or x>=COLS or y>=ROWS → collide; if y<0 → allow (above board) but our spawn keeps y>=0. For safety allow y<0 as not colliding (means free), but keep pieces within board... Simpler: treat y<0 as collision-free but also ensure spawn is visible. Actually with y=0 spawn everything visible. During play, pieces never go above. Fine — treat out-of-bounds y<0 as collision too? That would reject rotations that push a cell above row 0. Hmm, rotation of a 3x3 at top row could produce cells in row 0 area only... matrix rotation within matrix bounds, so no cells go outside matrix. So fine.

Now the loop:

```
let dropCounter=0, lastTime=0;
function update(time=0){ const dt=time-lastTime; lastTime=time; if(!paused && !gameOver){ dropCounter+=dt; if(dropCounter>dropInterval()){ dropCounter=0; moveDown(); } } draw(); requestAnimationFrame(update); }
```

moveDown(): if valid(current.x, current.y+1) → current.y++; else lockPiece().

lockPiece(): write cells to board; check game over if any cell row<0? not possible. Then clearLines(); then spawnNext(); if spawn collides → gameOver.

Wait — game over also should occur if the piece locks partially above visible... not needed.

clearLines(): iterate rows from bottom, if full → remove and unshift empty row, count++. Then score += table[count] * level; lines += count; level = floor(lines/10)+1.

Hard drop: while valid(y+1) y++; then lockPiece(); reset dropCounter.

Spawn next: current = makePiece(nextType); nextType = takeFromBag(); if(!valid(current)) gameOver.

Restart: reset all, bag=[], nextType=takeFromBag(), spawn.

takeFromBag: if bag empty, fill with shuffled [I,J,L,O,S,T,Z].

Pause: toggle paused; overlay "Paused".

Buttons: Pause/Resume (toggles label), Restart.

Show controls list in HTML.

Let me write with nice dark theme styling.

Also handle key repeat: browser keydown repeats are fine for movement.

Verification: I'll use browser tool: load index.html, screenshot, inspect DOM values. Use keyboard? The browser tool has "key" action and "click", "type". I can press keys at coordinates? key action probably sends key to page. Let me check what arguments: action "key", text = key name presumably. I'll try.

Let me write the file now.

For debug/testing hooks: expose `window.game` with getters, and maybe allow clicking buttons via IDs.

Write the HTML.

Detail: draw() draws board background, grid, locked cells, ghost, current piece, and if gameOver/paused overlay is DOM-based (CSS overlay), simpler.

Preview canvas: draw the next piece centered in its matrix.

Now write.

Font: use system fonts.

I'll write the file.

One more consideration: keydown handlers should preventDefault for Space/Arrows to avoid page scroll.

Piece colors:
I: #00c2d1 (cyan), J: #4d6bff (blue), L: #ff9f1c (orange), O: #ffd166 (yellow), S: #43d17b (green), T: #b15ce0 (purple), Z: #ff4d5e (red).

Drawing cells: fill color with slight gradient-ish: fillRect with color, then lighter top-left highlight inset, dark border.

Ghost: strokeRect with color alpha.

OK.

Level speed: dropInterval = Math.max(100, 1000 - (level-1)*100). Level 10 → 100ms.

Let me write it out.

Now run in browser and verify. Let me load and inspect.

Looks good. Board renders, next preview shows T piece, ghost shown at bottom. Now verify gameplay behavior with keys. Let me use the inspect and key actions.

Test: move left/right, rotate, hard drop, check state via __blockfall. Then pause/resume, restart.

Let me press keys and check state.

The piece moved left by one column (x decreased). Let me now rotate, hard drop, and inspect the state numerically. Let me use the "inspect" action to evaluate JS? The inspect action inspects DOM/console. Maybe there is a way to eval JS... Let me try inspect and see output; maybe it returns DOM. I can read state through a text dump? Alternatively, I could add the state into the DOM. But the hook is in window; maybe "inspect" gives console messages only.

Let me try typing in a way... Actually the browser tool may support evaluating JS via "type" into console? Not obvious. Let me just use keyboard + screenshots and verify via visible DOM (score/lines/level values update via text). The screenshot DOM output shows SCORE 0 etc.

Let me do: ArrowUp (rotate), Space (hard drop) then screenshot to see the piece locked and new piece spawned and preview advanced.

Interesting — the screenshot shows a purple T piece at top and a red Z at bottom (locked?). Wait — the earlier piece was Z (red). But the screenshot shows purple T as active piece and red Z near the bottom which appears locked... but score is still 0 and lines 0. Hmm.

Actually wait: this suggests time passed between my calls (frames accumulate). The earlier Z piece must have fallen and locked via gravity (took some seconds), then T spawned (matches next preview showing S now... the preview now shows green S). Hmm, but preview was T before.

So: gravity is running between tool calls, real time passes. The Z locked at bottom (red cells at bottom rows), then T spawned (purple active). My ArrowUp rotated the T? The T appears vertical-ish: cells at (row: cols) — appears as T rotated. Actually the T shown: top cell at center, then row of two, then one below center... that's a T rotated 90°? Looks like "T" rotated: vertical column with a nub. Yes rotated.

Wait but the ArrowUp I pressed in this call — the piece shown is rotated relative to default spawn (spawn is flat T with nub up). Yes it's rotated.

Hmm, but I pressed ArrowUp expecting to rotate the Z. Timing: gravity had locked the Z. Fine — that's expected behavior of real-time gravity.

Also earlier "ArrowLeft" moved piece left. Fine.

Now hard-drop the T and check score/lines and lock. Let me press Space and screenshot.

I should be careful about time passing between calls — the game keeps running. That's fine for testing lock behavior but harder to control. Let me use the pause feature to freeze, then check states deterministically via restart.

Actually a better verification approach: use the browser "inspect" action to see if I can eval JS. Let me check what inspect returns.

Now I see: T locked (purple cells at bottom), S piece is active (green, rotated with ghost below it), and next preview shows I. Ghost rendering works (outline of green below). Score still 0 because no lines cleared — expected.

Wait, but did the T lock? Purple cells near bottom: yes locked. And the Z red at bottom locked. Good.

Hmm, but the preview shows I piece while the active is S — but earlier the preview showed S. Consistent.

Now let me do a deterministic test sequence quickly with hard drops to see score/lines. Better: verify line clear scoring. That's harder via random play. Instead I can verify the scoring function via a test hook... Actually I could verify line clears by playing deliberately, but with random bag and timing that's tricky.

Alternative: temporarily add a test-only hook? I already have __blockfall. I could expose an internal testing function but that would be intrusive. Hmm — but I can verify line clear logic deterministically by executing JS in the page... the browser tool doesn't obviously support eval.

Let me check if the browser tool "type" can type into a focused input... not useful for eval.

Approach: Play the game via hard drops and see whether lines clear and score updates. With random pieces, filling 10 columns evenly is hard but doable-ish within time. Alternatively, verify the logic in node: extract the JS logic and unit-test clearLines/scoring in node by copying functions. That's a reasonable check of the algorithm.

Let me do a quick node test replicating the scoring/clear logic from the file (extract the script and run parts). Actually simpler: write a small node script that loads index.html, extracts the <script>, and... it uses DOM. Too complex.

Better: I'll write a small node test that reimplements nothing but copies the clearLines logic from the file text via regex? Overkill. Instead, I can do a headless-ish check: use node to parse the script and evaluate just the pure functions by stubbing document. Actually stubbing document is doable: define global document with getElementById returning fake elements with getContext returning proxy that swallows calls, addEventListener noop, requestAnimationFrame noop, performance.now. Then the IIFE runs and exposes window.__blockfall... but resetGame() runs at boot and draws. With stubs, it works. Then I can drive state: set board rows nearly full and hard-drop a piece to clear lines and check score.

But __blockfall only exposes getState/restart/togglePause — no way to inject board. Hmm, I could verify scoring by simulating keypresses through my stubbed document's keydown listener... that's a real path but fiddly.

Simplest robust plan: in node, stub the DOM, run the script, then manipulate via exposed hook + synthetic keydown events. To make line clears happen deterministically, I'd need control over the piece sequence — bag is random.

Alternative: temporarily add a test hook `__blockfall._testSetBoard` — no, avoid polluting.

Pragmatic approach given time budget: verify the pure logic (rotate/collision/clear/score) by extracting those functions in a node script that I write separately, duplicating the algorithm — this checks my algorithm is right but not that the file is right. Weak.

Better idea: node script that reads index.html, extracts the script text, and appends an export of internals... The IIFE hides internals. But I can eval the script text with a small modification: replace the final `})();` closing to expose internals? Fragile.

Alternative: Actually I can drive the real page through the browser tool with hard drops: each hard drop locks a piece. To clear a line I need to fill a row. With 10 columns and random pieces, I can pile pieces flat at the bottom by hard dropping them in various x positions. Since I can move left/right and rotate, I can place pieces to fill rows. It takes maybe 10-20 pieces to clear one line. Each key action is a tool call... could be many calls. Maybe 15-25 calls. Time-consuming but feasible? Each call seems fast. Risky though.

Middle ground: verify line-clear + scoring via node with the actual file's code by extracting the script and evaluating it in a sandbox where I stub DOM, and then, to inject a board, I temporarily append a test snippet to the script string in memory (not to the file) that exposes internals. That's clean: I modify the code string only in my test harness. The extracted script's closure ends with `})();` — I can instead run the whole IIFE body? Simpler: in the test harness, take script text and replace `window.__blockfall = {` with `window.__blockfall = { internals: { getBoard: function(){return board;}, setBoard: function(b){board=b;}, lockPiece: lockPiece, spawnNext: spawnNext, hardDrop: hardDrop, getPiece: function(){return piece;}, setPiece: function(p){piece=p;} },` — then I can set up a board with a nearly-full row and hard drop to check clearing and scoring.

That's a legit verification of the actual code in the file (only adding accessors in-memory). Let's do it. Need DOM stubs: document.getElementById -> object with getContext returning a Proxy that no-ops methods and property sets, textContent setter, className, classList {add,remove}, addEventListener noop, offsetWidth. document.addEventListener noop. requestAnimationFrame: I'll make it a noop to avoid infinite loop (since update recurses). performance.now.

Also `window` global object.

Let me write /tmp/job-c2MHhA/.test/test.js? It says end with index.html present — extra files may be OK but cleaner to put test in /tmp outside cwd. I'll put it at /tmp/tt-test.js.

Let me write it.

One issue: `setupRows(4)` after which level grows to 2 — but the first 4-line test expects score 800 at level 1 with lines=4. setupRows(4) sets level 1 then clears 4 → score 800, lines 4, level = floor(4/10)+1 = 1. So my check "level grew after >=10 lines" with s.level===2 is wrong: clearing 4 lines only gives 4 lines. I need 10+ lines. Let me fix that test: clear rows multiple times or set lines... Instead I'll do repeated setupRows-like clears to accumulate 10 lines. Simpler: run 3 clears of 4 lines each (12 lines) and check level becomes 2 and score = 800+1600+1600? Hmm level changes mid-way.

Let me restructure: loop hard drops with 4-row clears twice (8 lines, level 1 → 800+800=1600), then 2-row clear twice more → 12 lines total. Getting complicated. Simpler: after restart, do 4-row clear 3 times: after 1st: lines 4, level 1, score 800. 2nd: lines 8, level 1, score 1600. 3rd: lines 12, level 2, score 1600+1600=3200. So check after 3rd: level===2, score===3200. Good — that tests both level growth and multiplier in one.

Also note: in test 8, lockPiece calls spawnNext which may game-over? Board has empty rows so fine.

Test 9: lockPiece with full board → clearLines clears 20 rows first! Oops: full board rows are all '#f00' → all rows full → all cleared → then spawn succeeds, no game over. Fix: make board full but with one hole per row so no row clears.

Also test 5: after hardDrop of I at y=18 with x=0 horizontal I covering cols 0-3 at row 19... wait matrix row 1 is the filled one, y=18 → filled row at 19 covering cols 0..3. Bottom row has cols 0..8 filled → combined covers 0..8 + 0..3 = 0..8 → still missing col 9. Oops. Let me instead fill cols 0..8 and drop horizontal I at x=6 (covers 6..9) at row 19. But careful: hardDrop moves down until collision; at y=18 with filled row at 19 cols 0-8, dropping at x=6 would collide immediately at row 19? The piece's filled row at y=19 cols 6..9 — cols 6,7,8 occupied → collision at y=18 already. Hmm.

Better approach: fill bottom row cols 0..8, and place piece vertical I at x=9 spanning rows 16..19 → fills (19,9) completing the bottom row. Vertical I matrix [[1,0,0,0],[1,0,0,0],[1,0,0,0],[1,0,0,0]] x=9 → cols 9, rows y..y+3. At y=16 covers rows 16-19 col 9. Bottom row becomes full → cleared → 1 line. But careful: hard drop from y=16: can it move further down? At y=17 would cover rows 17-20 → row 20 out of bounds → collision. So it stops at 16. Good. But then remaining 3 cells at col 9 rows 16,17,18... after clear of row 19, they shift down to rows 17,18,19. Fine.

But wait — test 5 also requires only 1 line cleared. Bottom row full → cleared; rows above (18,17,16) have just col-9 cells → not full. Good.

Let me rewrite tests 5-7 accordingly:

- Test 5 (1 line): bottom row cols 0..8, vertical I at x=9, y=16 → 100 points, lines 1.
- Test 6 (2 lines): rows 18,19 cols 0..8; vertical I at x=9 y=16 → fills rows 16..19 col 9 → rows 18,19 become full → 2 lines cleared → 300. Good.
- Test 7 (3 lines): rows 17,18,19 cols 0..8, vertical I x=9 y=16 → rows 17,18,19 full → 500.
- Test 8 (4 lines): rows 16..19 cols 0..8, vertical I x=9 y=16 → 4 full rows → 800.

For level growth: do 4-line clear 3 times and expect score 3200 and level 2.

Also careful: the I piece spawn in these tests uses custom matrix; hardDrop loops while canPlace(y+1). Fine.

Also in test 4: `check('new piece spawned after lock', s.piece.type === n1 || true)` is vacuous — fix: piece type should equal previous nextType. Since spawnNext assigns piece from nextType then takes new next. Actually in resetGame, nextType = takeType() then spawnNext() → piece = makePiece(nextType), nextType = takeType(). So after restart, s.piece.type === the initial nextType. Then after hardDrop, new piece type should be n1 (the previous next). But gravity could interfere? hardDrop is synchronous. But between restart and getState... no time passes in node since rAF is a noop. Good. Let me write it properly: capture n1 = api.getState().nextType before drop; after drop, s.piece.type === n1.

Also test 2 right-edge check is sloppy; let me simplify: move right 15 times, then check that piece cannot move further right (canPlace(x+1) false) OR x+width<=10. Actually just check board bounds: every filled cell within 0..9 and no overlap. Let me write a helper `pieceInBounds(p)`.

Also `sandbox.Math` etc. — vm context with Math passed is fine. But `performance` needed? update isn't called (rAF noop). Fine.

Also `document.addEventListener` stores handler — fine.

Let me rewrite the test file.

One concern: `s.piece` from getState returns {type,x,y} not matrix — so `inBounds(s.piece)` in test 1 will fail since matrix undefined. Let me use I.getPiece() instead. Fix in test 1.

Also test 4 'next preview advanced' check is vacuous — make it meaningful: new nextType is a valid tetromino and piece type === n1 (already checked). I'll drop the vacuous one and instead check that nextType is a valid type after the drop.

Let me fix those two and run.

Note: `inBounds(I.getPiece())` uses p.matrix — getPiece returns piece object which has matrix. Fine.

Run.

Two failures — let me analyze whether they're test bugs or game bugs.

1. "score is level-multiplied" — got 2400 instead of 3200. Let me trace: 3 iterations of 4-line clear.
   - iter1: score += 800*1 = 800 → score 800, lines 4, level = floor(4/10)+1 = 1.
   - iter2: +800*1 = 800 → 1600, lines 8, level 1.
   - iter3: +800*1 = 800 → 2400, lines 12, level 2.
   Ah — level is computed AFTER the score is awarded. So at the 3rd clear, level was still 1 when scoring. That's standard Tetris behavior actually (score uses level at time of clear, then level updates). Hmm, but the spec says "increases gravity speed every ten cleared lines" and "multiplied by the current level". "Current level" at the time of the clear = 1. So 2400 is arguably correct per spec. But typical expectation: level 2 after 10 lines → subsequent scoring at level 2.

   Actually is it more standard to compute level before awarding? In classic NES Tetris, the level displayed updates after line clear, and points are scored with the level at start of the clear... Actually the scoring uses the current level (before level-up). Both defensible. But the spec's requirement "Start at level 1 and increase gravity speed every ten cleared lines" — my implementation satisfies it. Score multiplier "current level" — the level shown at the time. Ambiguity. However, my test expectation was 3200 assuming level-2 for the third clear... wait no: third clear happens at lines 8→12, crossing 10. If level were computed first (level = floor(8/10)+1 = 1 at the start), still 1. To get 1600 on the third clear, level would need to be 2 based on lines 8 → no. So even computing level before scoring within the same clear wouldn't help — level before the 3rd clear is 1 (8 lines). My expected 3200 was wrong math: 800*1 + 800*1 + 800*1 = 2400. To get level-2 multiplier I'd need a 4th clear. So the test expectation is wrong, not the game.

   Let me fix the test: after 3 clears expect 2400 and level 2; then do a 4th 4-line clear → +1600 → 4000. That verifies the multiplier.

   Hmm, but which order is "correct"? The spec says "multiplied by the current level" — at the moment of scoring, level shown is 1 (since level updates after). Either is fine; I'll verify level-2 multiplier applies on subsequent clears. Actually to be more player-friendly and unambiguous, I could update level before scoring so that the 12th line's clear scores at level 2. Hmm. Standard guideline (tetris.wiki): score = points × level, where level is the level before the line clear... Actually the classic formula uses the current level number. I'll keep scoring with the level at the time of the clear (before level-up) — matches "current level" literally. But then after crossing a level boundary mid-clear, the player sees level 2 while the awarded points used level 1 — slightly confusing.

   Better: compute the new level first, then award score with the new level? For the 10th line clear (e.g., clearing 1 line bringing lines to 10), that would award 100*2=200. Hmm, most implementations award with the level at which the clear happened.

   I'll keep it simple and defensible: award using the level value at the time of the clear (pre-level-up), and just fix the test. Actually wait — think about the verifier of the task: "Award 100, 300, 500, or 800 points ... multiplied by the current level." A tester would likely test at level 1: clear 1 line → 100. Fine either way. Keep as is.

2. "game over when spawn is blocked" — FAIL. Why? I filled the board fully except nb[0][0]=null. Then setNext('T'), lockPiece(). But lockPiece first writes the current piece's cells into the board — the current piece is whatever spawned at restart... it writes into board (overwriting) then clearLines() runs: each row is full except rows with holes... I set nb[0][0] = null, so only row 0 has a hole; rows 1..19 are completely full → 19 rows clear! That wipes the board. Test bug.

   Fix: make every row have a hole so nothing clears: e.g. nb[r][r % 10] = null. But then the spawned piece might fit in a hole column... The spawn piece is at y=0 region — row 0 and 1 near cols 3-5. If holes are at varying columns, spawn might be possible. To guarantee blocked spawn while no row clears: fill all rows except one hole per row, and make holes align in a single column (e.g., col 0 in every row) — then a piece could spawn if its cells avoid col 0... Spawn x=3 for 3-wide pieces (cols 3-5) → those cells would collide with filled cells at rows 0-2 cols 3-5. Wait, with hole at col 0 in every row, cells at cols 3-5 rows 0-2 are filled → any spawn collides. Good, and no row is full (each row has hole at col 0).

   But careful: lockPiece writes current piece cells first — current piece after restart spawns at top center; its cells overwrite filled cells (same value-ish, fine), then clearLines: rows 0..2 still have holes at col 0 → not full. Good. Then spawnNext: piece = makePiece(nextType='T') at cols 3-5 rows 0-2 → collides → gameOver. 

   Also the piece locked could fill the col-0 hole? The current piece is at x=3 center (3x3), cells at cols 3-5. No. But if the current piece were O at x=4, cols 4-5. Fine.

   Actually one more: after restart, the piece is from the bag; whatever it is, it's centered (cols ~3-5 or I at cols 3-6), so col 0 hole stays open. Good.

Let me fix both test expectations and re-run.

Need path. Also the 4th clear expectation: after 3 clears lines=12 level=2. Then clear 4 more lines → lines=16, level = floor(16/10)+1 = 2, not 3. Score += 800*2 = 1600 → 4000. So level stays 2. Fix expectation: level===2.

Wait: level 3 would require 20 lines. Right. So expect score 4000, level 2.

Run the test quickly, then do a quick browser recheck of Pause/Resume/Restart and finish.

All 35 pass. Now quick browser check of Pause/Resume/Restart buttons (DOM-driven), then finish.

index.html is already saved. Let me do one quick browser pass: click Pause (button), check overlay DOM shows "PAUSED"; click Resume; click Restart; check score 0 and board empty. Use click at coordinates. Pause button around (772, 730) in the 1200x800 viewport screenshot; Restart at (772, 780) — partially cut off at bottom (y=780 near edge). Click at (772, 778). Might be fine.

Actually simpler: use keyboard P for pause and R for restart, plus one button click. But requirement says provide Pause/Resume and Restart buttons — clicking them verifies wiring. Let me click Pause button then screenshot to see overlay.

The game reached Game Over naturally (pieces stacked while real time passed between my calls — natural play). The overlay shows "GAME OVER" correctly. Score shows 0/0/1 — wait, score 0 with stacked pieces? Lines never cleared and no bonuses. Fine.

Interesting: the stack looks like pieces piled in center-ish columns... looks reasonable, and game over triggered when spawn blocked. Good — that also confirms the Game Over path in the real page.

Now click Restart to verify reset, and confirm the board is cleared, score/lines/level reset.

Restart cleared the board (only fresh S piece + ghost visible), score 0, lines 0, level 1, next preview shows T, button back to "Pause", overlay hidden. 

Now quickly verify Pause button + resume in one call... I already have pause/resume verified in the node tests and the button click earlier hit the pause button while game over (it showed "Resume" text — actually that was from endGame). Let me do one quick pause click to check overlay shows PAUSED. Click pause at (772,730).

Time is tight; one more call then final report.

Pause overlay works, button switched to "Resume". The game is verified. index.html is saved. Final report.

Also note the piece is frozen (paused) — good.

Report what I checked and what remains unverified.