You probably don't need another AI tool yet

Follow one asset into the game

Take a recent task from beginning to end. For an icon, that might be briefing, generation, selection, background removal, resizing and import. Write down where the work stalled.

The attractive preview isn't the finish line. An image still needs cleanup; generated code still needs to fit the project. I care about the point where the output becomes something the next step can use.

If the slow part is importing files or fixing inconsistent scale, another generator may leave the main problem untouched. Try improving that handoff first.

Give a replacement one real job

Choose a bounded comparison, such as three matching inventory icons or a reproducible restart bug. Use the same requirements in the existing workflow and the proposed replacement.

Record the usable result, the cleanup and whether you could make a revision. Include the time spent learning and configuring the tool. That effort may be worthwhile, but it belongs in the decision.

I'd keep the old project working while running the experiment separately. You need a route back if the promising replacement creates a new dependency or cannot export what the game needs.

Stop comparing when you have an answer

Write down why you are keeping or rejecting the tool for this task. A good decision can be narrow: useful for concept art, unsuitable for animation frames, or worth revisiting when the project needs a different export.

Then give the chosen workflow enough time to become familiar. Switching before you learn the basics makes every tool feel awkward and prevents you from finding its useful limits.

My test for the following week would be a finished small feature. If the new setup helps that feature reach a playable build with less confusion, it earned its place. If it only produced a more impressive folder of experiments, the bottleneck is probably still waiting for you.

Sources & further reading

• Reddit: My problem with AI gamedev — accessed Sep 9, 2026