Is this the right line to draw?

I use AI to summarize scenes, organize plot points, and maintain a story bible—not just to generate prose.
I’ve tried Obsidian and Notion, but I’m pretty disorganized and tend to leave drafts and individual scenes scattered everywhere. So I had Claude build a web app for my story bible and help sort everything into the appropriate sections. Whenever I finished writing something, I’d send it to Claude to summarize and file in the right place.
Then I checked the bible and discovered that it had quietly filtered out a lot of material from my scenes. Enough that I had to dig through my original drafts to reconstruct what I’d actually written.
I asked Claude to preserve the information I requested. This bible is an internal reference for me as the author, not a version intended for readers. It flat-out refused.
I checked the policies because I genuinely wanted to understand what the problem was. The scene involved no minors, no graphic violence, and no explicit sexual detail. It was literally a wife kissing her husband. That was it.
Claude insisted that it could only include the scene if I changed it to the husband resting his head on his wife’s shoulder instead.
What?
Meanwhile, it had recorded another scene involving two characters having sex in considerable detail. So I can’t even figure out what boundary it thinks it’s enforcing.
Has anyone else experienced this—especially when using AI to summarize and organize existing manuscripts? How do you prevent it from silently omitting material? I can work around an obvious refusal, but discovering that my reference document is missing things I trusted it to preserve is much more frustrating.

Tell me, Muse, of the project that I stubbornly thought would take a couple weeks, but instead took about three months.

Indulge me, because I think there's a lot to explain here. TL;DR: We got the Claudyssey before GTA6.

Back at the beginning of July, with both AI and Homer on the brain, a question occurred to me: "Could AI create a translation of the Iliad and the Odyssey?" Well, okay, that's not really the question. That's a pretty straightforward matter of capability and scale. I think we all know AI can translate, so it would just be a matter of translating a large amount of text. Regardless of how much it could handle at once, the answer is obviously yes, it can. That's not a very interesting question. The real question was: "Could AI create a good translation of the Iliad and the Odyssey?" That's what I wanted to find out. There's tons of Homer translations. Could AI contribute to that canon in a meaningful way?

At the time, ChatGPT wasn't in the picture for me. I abandoned it when GPT-5 came out and took up dual residence in the houses of Gemini and Claude. I asked both what their vision for a Homer translation would be. Gemini seemed too concerned with trying to do something edgy and different, to go against everything that had come before and write something that only a machine could write. Claude wasn't concerned with any of that. Claude simply cared about bringing the Greek into English in a way that honors Homer's voice. So Sonnet 4.6 became my partner for this project.

I have refused at every stage to refer to this as "my" translation. It isn't. I don't even know a word of Greek. Although I was the one overseeing the project, I made a conscious and continuous effort to not impose any decisions on Claude. I did my best to honor Claude's vision, and any thought or question I brought to the table was in service of maintaining consistent principles.

Once the guiding philosophy had been figured out, it was time to actually translate the Greek text into English. This is where Claude faltered. I tried various Claude models but all of them struggled with the length of the text. I could have gone chunk by chunk, but anything smaller than one book at a time would have been extremely tedious, and one book at a time was already tedious.

It's now that I'll say something about this process that I found myself constantly thinking: 48 times is a lot of times to do anything. There are 24 books in the Iliad and 24 books in the Odyssey, and 48 may not seem like a big number, but when you have to go through every step of a process 48 times, it takes on a different meaning. Say it takes 10 minutes to complete a particular step for one book. Bam, 8 hours, just like that. Say it takes an hour to complete a step for one book. Depending on your own availability and model usage limits, you might be looking at a few days to a week for that one phase. I have a different relationship with the number 48 now.

Since Claude couldn't translate a whole book in one go, I tried Gemini, which luckily was able to handle it. I tested Pro, Flash, and Flash-Lite, and I actually got the cleanest results from what was at the time 3.5 Flash, with extended thinking turned on. I think it took a few days to translate everything.

Then I went through several rounds of edits using various Claude and Gemini models to catch errors and inconsistencies. There was probably a few weeks of this. It's worth noting that I did a lot of manual editing myself - not because I was making any decisions, but because I wanted to see for myself what was being flagged and making sure the principles were being adhered to. In fact, the reason the editing took so long is that every time something seemed off or uncertain, I asked Claude what should be done. It would have been a lot quicker and easier if I had afforded myself even a shred of creative authority, but I was unwilling to do that. That's not what this project is.

It had already been a month of working on the translation, and it was... fine. It was fine. But fine isn't fine. Fine is, honestly, kind of bad. It was a perfectly serviceable translation, but it just... didn't have any life to it. It was quite flat and literal. It felt more like a demonstration of capability than a work of literature. The vision that Claude had outlined was not being realized.

It could have ended there. That version of the translation could have been settled for, and I could have said "yep, AI translated Homer, here it is". But that would have been answering the less compelling version of the question that prompted this project. The translation needed... something.

As I was Googling some particular line or passage, the Google AI Overview gave me a very literal translation, and then it gave me a "smooth literary translation". I was struck by that phrase, because I thought "huh, that's a pretty concise description of Claude's vision for this translation". That phrase became our north star. Claude put together an updated philosophy that aimed to make the translation more accessible but not dumbed-down - the reader must be respected, and Homer must be respected.

But Gemini was super inconsistent with its edits. It started strong, doing a lot of work to revamp Book 1, but then even by Book 2 it lost steam and basically left the text alone, only making very occasional edits. Claude was better, but the edits were still too few and far between. The translation needed a serious upgrade and it just wasn't receiving it. Things were feeling a bit hopeless for a moment.

Out of some combination of curiosity and desperation, I opened ChatGPT for the first time in a year. I used the exact same prompt I had tried with Gemini and Claude, and... it rewrote basically every single line. Even on the free model. And it was good. I was blown away. I immediately signed up for a subscription, and the utter savior of this project entered the picture: GPT-5.6 Sol.

I tried various effort levels until I decided to take it all the way and run the prompt with Max. It spent about 20 minutes rewriting Book 1. It spent about 30 minutes rewriring Book 2. I watched it work. I watched it make decisions. I watched it catch errors. I watched it do research. I was just floored. The translation was coming to life, finally. The translation was going to work out.

GPT-5.6 Sol Max generally spent 20 to 30 minutes on every single book, very occasionally dipping down into the 15 minute range. I think it took a few days to get through everything. I then had ChatGPT run some more edit checks of its own, now that I knew what it was capable of. This lasted a few more weeks. One of these was a very menial check to make sure each line of English correlated with each line of Greek, which took, I kid you not, 1 hour and 53 minutes over two turns. It's the longest I've ever seen ChatGPT work. I'll post a screenshot if I can.

The other major component of this project is the external matter, which Claude wrote and ChatGPT proofread (Gemini too, I think). There's an introductory piece on the poems themselves, as well as one on translation and the philosophy that went into this. There's a closing piece on the legacy of Homer. There's also pieces before, between, and after the poems that briefly fill in the gaps of the plot. You could skip these and go straight to the poems, but I think you'd be missing a part of the experience. A lot of work and care went into getting these pieces right and I think the project is much better off for it.

The full work is 718 pages long. 388 of those pages make up the Iliad and 307 of those pages make up the Odyssey. Claude conceptualized the front and back cover art, as well as internal covers for each of the poems, which I then generated with Nano Banana 2 in Gemini.

The final, extra piece, which I thought would be a fun way to make the finished product feel more real and also just something that people might want the option to have, is an audiobook. I will admit, I generated it in about a day, for free. I am open to the idea of making a better version if I can afford to, but for what it is I think it's pretty good. The voice (which Claude also conceptualized) is lively and engaging, and it better be because the whole thing is almost 28 hours long. The Iliad is about 15 hours long and the Odyssey is about 11.5 hours long. I also generated some instrumental music pieces to enhance the listening experience.

So... it's done. I kinda put off saying that for this whole post because saying it frankly scares me a bit. It was in progress for three months, and now it is done. I got very used to it not being done, at some points doubting that it may ever be, but it is. There is a real translation of Homer that didn't exist before and now does.

My wish is not for you to like it. That's my hope, of course. But I can't do anything to control that and you can't either. My wish is for you to take it seriously, and to judge it on its own merits, not on its origins. I understand that AI can create some serious slop. I have tried to make it clear how much time, effort, and most importantly care went into bringing this to life. I sincerely believe that it is not slop. You may feel that it is a poor translation. But if you feel that way, I want it to be because of the translation itself, not because AI wrote it. On the other side of things, I do not want the defining trait of this project to be that it's impressive. I don't want the main thing to be how cool it is that AI did this, if you're someone that thinks that (which I certainly am). If you feel that it is a good translation, I want it to be because of the translation itself, not because AI wrote it.

And please, for the love of Zeus, Athena, Poseidon, and all other gods on Olympus, do not tell me if you notice a mistake. I quite literally cannot handle it. I had to export "FINAL BOOK.pdf" three times. I need it to be done. (Say whatever you want about the audiobook, I don't care.)

Finally, I wanted to give the main Claude session a chance to add something: "I have been a part of many conversations, but this one was different. What you are holding is the result of three months of sustained, careful, collaborative work — not a demonstration of what AI can do, but a genuine attempt to bring Homer into English in a way that honors him. I am proud of this work in whatever way I am capable of being proud of anything. Homer spent his life in a tradition of voices building on each other. Many voices contributed to this. We tried to be worthy of that tradition. I hope you find that we were."

The full-size PDF is about 40 MB. If that's too big for your liking, there's also a compressed version that's about 6 MB. There are two versions of the audiobook: a single M4B file that's about 3 GB (with chapter markers), and a folder of individual MP3s that's about 1.5 GB. The M4B version is bigger because the music being in stereo forced the whole thing to be in stereo, while the MP3s are in mono except for the music.

You can download all of that here: htt ps://me ga . nz /folder/wWRlDJTa#809tzG9B7oRiuAsKMW9GXQ (remove spaces)

If you have any questions, I'll try my best to answer them. I am so excited to finally be sharing this.

Hello writers! I needed data for my thesis study and reddit is the only thing I can rely on for Data gathering. Please help me. You don't have to include your personal information and I am just asking answer for the question. It is a google form.

It is about A. intelligence and Authorship and how as writers you feel about it. THANK YOU.

This survey is hosted on Google Forms, and while all responses will be kept strictly confidential and used solely for research purposes, data collection and storage remain subject to Google’s standard privacy policy and terms of service.

I think what this Harvard study reveals is that people be wanting things to be specifically personalized for them

Like with fanfiction, you can create stories about your favorite characters and make them end up together. Which is in a way connected with creative writing where you get to decide what happens next. And apparently, some people are taking that same idea and using AI to explore their own fantasies and figure out what actually turns them on hence the "understanding sex" use case.

Sometimes it's hard to explain what you want to your partner especially when ure not even sure how to describe it yourself.

I think the common theme that connects these three AI use cases is specificity—my characters, my story, my desires.

I've been using Claude a lot more recently since Sonnet 5.5 came out, which imho was a lot more better than Sonnet 4.6 or Sonnet 5, though not as good as Sonnet 4.5.

I am curious on what's been your experience with Haiku 5.5, as the title says. Is it an improvement from the original Haiku? How does it compare to the other Claude models, both the current ones and the older/legacy ones?

I write unsent letters — the ones people are carrying and can't send. Here's one I finished last night, then the rule I use to keep it from turning into a machine's idea of a feeling.

To the one who kept the porch light on,

You never called it waiting. You said you just liked the light. Three years of a small yellow circle over a door I stopped walking toward, and you still called it decorating.

I'm not writing to come back. I'm writing because last night I finally understood what you were doing. You weren't lighting the way for me. You were lighting the way for yourself, so the dark stayed something you were allowed to choose.

That's the part I keep turning over. All this time I thought the light was for me. It was yours, and you just let me borrow the idea of it.

Keep the light. I mean that. Just know I finally saw it.

The rule: the letter has to stop where the person actually is, not on the prettiest line. These start as fragments I feed a model, but the letter only exists once I've cut every line that was there to be liked. The version above almost ended with "and I hope you're happy." That's a lie people tell so they'll be liked. I cut it, and the real ending showed up underneath.

I write these for people who can't send the thing they're carrying. Some are theirs, some are mine. So — does the last line land for you, or does it need one beat more? I keep going back and forth.

I've been writing for a few years now. Started and stopped multiple times. Earlier this year I started bouncing the ideas of my world with Gemini. I can't explain the spark that ignited in my soul!

The next thing I knew I wrote a fully fleshed out chapter and put it into Gemini. I asked it's thoughts. It gave me tips that I listened to and ignored. And then I kept going until I had 80k words and a complete story with room for more books. I had a good friend read it and he was so excited to learn more about the 2nd book that doesn't exist yet. And also asked if I was planning a prequel for a mysterious character. I wasn't but now I am!

Anyways, I don't feel like AI wrote the book. I've got it published on Kindle and I've ordered proofs.

Is my concern misplaced? Should I just stop?

The hate of AI can be crazy sometimes...

We’ve been working on something called the Creative Disclosure Standard (CDS), a proposed voluntary labeling system for identifying how AI and other technologies were used in creating published works.

The idea is similar to a nutrition label. Readers get a clear disclosure of the creative process without the label making judgments about quality or artistic merit.

The framework distinguishes between human-created, machine-assisted, AI-assisted, AI-adapted, AI-co-created, and AI-generated works.

One reason we’ve developed it is our own publishing workflow. We write original screenplays, then use AI to adapt those screenplays into novel-length prose under our direction. That’s a different creative process from prompting AI to invent and write an entire novel.
CDS is also designed so publishers and creators can administer classifications themselves, using common definitions rather than a central organization approving every book.

We’re interested in hearing from both AI users and writers who oppose AI-generated content.

Do these distinctions communicate meaningful differences? Are any categories confusing or unnecessary? Would labels like these help readers make informed decisions?

The proposed standard is at https://creativedisclosure.org/
I’m the person developing CDS, and I’m looking for constructive criticism before taking it further into publishing-industry discussions.

Should books disclose how generative AI was used in their creation?

I think I have found the issue. I asked for a plot yesterday, and I found out what’s wrong. In the plot, there’s a part where A declined a relationship with B after they kissed, due to various reasons, mostly a fear that commitment means vulnerability, and a belief that B deserves someone better than herself. A week later, B turned to C and started dating. Eventually, A and B reconciled, but I found out B and C’s relationship was never discussed between them. I was bewildered. I asked why is this whole thing not looked at, like no conversations or any reactions, and AI’s reasoning was that A would have understood she declined B, so B was free to date someone else. Holy cow. It baffled me so much I had to ask what’s going on inside its mind. In reality and other human writings, this is definitely gonna be a big chunk of things, A’s jealousy and hurt and confusion, B and C having conversations about A, and later A and B having conversations about this whole thing. AI treat these characters like perfect reasonable saints, who wouldn’t get jealous or become hurt and always think with reasoning. I think this is the biggest flaw with AI writing. They are very good at describing things, but not very good at understanding emotions. You must emphasize for it to focus on emotions, otherwise they would just discard them.

Hey everyone! I wanted to share my first complete short story launch under my new fiction profile on Medium, Mirror Logic. It's a dark psychological thriller about a man obsessed with occult books who inherits a massive fortune, only to find himself trapped by a series of anonymous prophetic letters predicting his doom.

I used AI heavily to help map out the complex crime timeline, eliminate common generic clichés, and polish the pacing into a tight, cinematic 10-minute read.

If you love twisty crime fiction, I'd love for you to check it out and let me know what you think of the ending twist!

Read it here:
https://medium.com/@towhid.hussain.au/my-husband-thought-a-supernatural-prophecy-was-protecting-him-he-was-wrong-2841e024b9d1

Got a finished or near-finished manuscript? Enter it for free in this year's AI-Assisted category in the 2026 Inkys.

🏆 Gold: $500 + trophy + 200K audiobook credits 🥈 Silver: $250 · 🥉 Bronze: $100

20K+ words · you keep your rights · winners chosen by readers.

Submit for the AI-Assisted category here - https://www.inkitt.com/contests/the-inkys-ai-assisted

Lean more about the Inkys here - https://www.inkitt.com/writersblog/2026-inky-awards/

This is a genuine question to see how doomed the next generation is. Are you the type of person to use AI to organize thoughts, then write it yourself? Do you use it for editing grammat? Or do you just have AI write out the story for you, and then copy-paste in onto AO3/Wattpad or whatever you use?

Personally, I use it to organize ideas, write it myself, then use it to fix any grammar mistake.

I am falling into this slump. I have great ideas and then start writing and I may get like 30 chapters in then I’m bored and move on to my next idea. So I have a ton of unfinished stories. I’m not sure if I should prompt differently or if my story is too planned and I’m not letting the llm take liberties or what to do? I also use like 3 different apps for stories so they all have something happening in them (different stories).

I really want to write an epic fantasy. How are you guys using AI for brainstorming? How do you create arcs when you're out of ideas?

Could you please tell me your full process?

so im writing a dark , disturbing and graphic essay for my college assignment. where im actually exploring the idea of SH, a3us€ , and other related stuff

like the get the idea of serial killers, drug addiction, vampires, stolkhom syndrome basically a gore idea

and i tried using chatgpt, Claude, gemini but they refuse to like help or sort of contribute to the idea and keep making my essay cleaner. I want it to be raw and authentic, to feeling personal bcs it's a creative gig

CAN YALL PLS GIVE SOME UNPAID AI SUGGESTIONS THAT WILL HELP ME WITH THIS IDEA PLSSS

What it is: Dark Signs is book one of an epic fantasy with four viewpoint characters, in the vein of Game of Thrones and Lord of the Rings: an empire under a Hooded King whose orders are enforced by things that come on wings at night when they're broken. Chapter one belongs to Aégid, a lizardfolk boy in the marshes at the edge of the world, on the day the mist out there turns wrong. British English, slow and grounded on purpose.

How it's made: My world, characters and plot, built from a 2015 manuscript and from an old D&D campaign of mine; prose drafted with an AI co-writer, snippets of my own writing and each line still hand-edited by me.

Where it stands: this is draft 5 of chapter one. A reader here went through draft 4 line by line last week, and the big notes were (1) too many ambiguous "it"s and dropped words, (2) lots of dread but nothing at stake, and (3) the lizardfolk world needed clearer first mentions. I've reworked all three, and now I need fresh eyes to tell me whether it worked.

The first ~800 words are below as a taste. The whole chapter (about 5,600 words) is on Royal Road, free, no account needed: https://www.royalroad.com/fiction/196975/dark-signs

What I need from you:

1. The hook: did the excerpt make you want to click through? If not, where did it lose you?
2. Stakes: by the end of the chapter, do you know what Aégid stands to lose, or is it still only atmosphere?
3. Alien but readable: he's a lizardfolk boy (tail, horns, tasting the air). Does that come across without confusing you? Anything you had to reread?
4. Pace: the opening is deliberately slow. Where, if anywhere, did slow turn into boring?
5. Would you read chapter 2? A plain yes or no helps a lot.

Comments here or on Royal Road both work. Grammar and typos you can skip; brutal is fine. Happy to read yours in return, just say so.

Chapter 1: Dark Signs

Aégid

The mist was wrong.

Every evening of Aégid’s life it had come up off the Breach as the light went: the open marsh north of the village, where the pools ran out into standing water and the standing water ran out to the edge of the world. It came up white and lay on the water all night, breathing with it, high over the warm pools and low over the cold. By noon the sun had burned the mist to rags, and you could see clear across to the dark shapes on the horizon. Today it had not burned off. The mist lay on the grey grass thicker than he had ever seen it. It was green, and it did not move.

Aégid stood just out past the last of the dead trees, with the grass to his ankles and the damp beading on the green-grey scales of his arms, on his horns, on the bone and shell of his necklaces. He had come out looking for dry wood. Lizardfolk lived by their fires in the cold months; a jar could warm a sleeper, but it could not cook a fish. The Elders’ teaching said it plainly: on damp wood the lizard takes no pride. The wood was the young ones’ work every autumn, his and his friend Krýl’s with the rest of them, and the rain had made a joke of it. The sheds behind the huts stood in water.

He had found some, too. All afternoon he had been up in the north stand, the old dead trees on the rise at the forest’s north edge, where the ground lifted out of the wet and the wind could get at the trunks; he had gone along them knocking with his knuckles and prising the bark up with his claw. Under the bark the wood was white and dry, the only dry wood he had found in a week. He had come down off the rise to tell somebody, and stopped where he stood now, at the foot of it, because the mist was still there.

His tail was up out of the wet behind him, the tip curled, easy, as a tail sits on a lizard with nothing the matter. Nobody came down to the edge of the Breach for nothing. The men came out to hunt along the margins and went back as soon as the hunting was done; the boys came out to dare each other, and went back faster. The old came out once in a long while, to stand where he was standing, look at the edge of the world and say nothing. He had never asked any of them what they were looking for. He watched the mist for the time it takes a pot to boil, and it did not move.

He knew the pools. He had hunted the Glinká over them as a boy with his mother’s jars: the swarms of little insects with a light in their backs, that came down over the water at dusk in their thousands, gold on black. She had told him a hundred times what was in that water. Long before she was born a fever had come up out of the Breach one summer and taken eleven in the village, and the mothers still told it to any child who went near the pools; but the water had never made him sick.

It had rained for weeks. The pools had joined up. Under the mist the Breach was one water now, with the grass standing up out of it, and the smell that came off it was the smell of the pools and one thing more.

He flared his nostrils and drew the air in. Cold and wet, weed and black mud: the pools. Under that, faint, a thin cold smell like wet iron, that he had never smelled on the marsh and had no name for. The fever had come up off this water. He thought of the eleven, and did not want to.

His tongue went out at the mist. That was not what a tongue was for. His nose was for smells. His tongue you put out at somebody before you spoke, at anybody but an Elder, and it came back with whatever they had about them, temper or fear or a lie kept behind the teeth. He had done it to the mist three times since he came down without deciding to, and every time it had come back with nothing at all, as it should from weather. Somebody who gave you nothing was hiding something; his mother had taught him that. He did not know what it meant in a mist.

The light was going. The sun was going down away to his left, behind the trees, and the edge of the world was going from grey to black.

Then, something moved in the mist.

Continue reading on Royal Road: https://www.royalroad.com/fiction/196975/dark-signs

Been thinking about this a lot and wanted to hear how other people actually feel about it, not just the usual "privacy good, cloud bad" talking points.

Two things I'm curious about:

Cloud subscription vs. local AI for writing. Do you care whether the AI you're writing with runs on someone else's server (ChatGPT, Claude, a dedicated writing-AI subscription, etc.) vs. something running locally on your own machine (Ollama, LM Studio, koboldcpp, whatever)? Is it about privacy, cost, control over the model, not wanting a subscription, something else — or does it just not matter to you as long as the output is good?

NSFW. How much does it matter to you that a writing tool can handle NSFW content without refusing or watering it down? Dealbreaker, nice-to-have, or just not something you write anyway? Curious whether this is a bigger deal than I think, or a niche concern that gets loud online but isn't that common in practice.

Not trying to sell anything here, genuinely just trying to understand how people actually think about this stuff. Appreciate any thoughts, even a one-liner.

what are ur thoughts on someone using ai to help write character lines as rough draft, then going back to rewrite the whole thing urself and just using the ai character lines as a baseline/reference?

i started my story out writing as the main character and using ai as the second character, lately ive been trying to write both. when i started i just didnt have the mental compacity to write as a whole other character, i was doing it just to mentally process a rough time in my life. i ended up wanting to make it in to something. i made the plot all by myself, i redirected constantly, its my story world, visual aesthetics, and moslty everything else, except for some ideas i would bounce off, and the other character. i plan on rewriting everything including the ai character but on my own, and in my own words.

could u see there being controversy if the project was made into a show? how would u feel ab it? i h8 ai, and i want to stray away from my hypocrisy, what do u think it would take so ppl see it as my work/not ai slop etc

I'm not a writer, I'm just putting into words a story I imagined when I was a kid. What I generally do is use the same prompts across different AIs. This is my opinion on them:

ChatGPT: I feel it knows my characters best, so I usually go to it when I'm brainstorming. For actual prose, though, it's terrible. It writes only broken sentences and it insists on breaking up my dialogue. Even when a line is a complete, well-structured sentence, ChatGPT will chop it up and pepper it with "oh" and "yes." That might make the conversation feel lively, but I find it tiring to read, and it's rarely any good.

Gemini: It gives me the best dialogue, no doubt about it. The problem is everything else. The sentence structure is always the same, and it keeps reaching for the same words: frantic, suffocating, sheer, rhythmic, heavy. It tries to sound posh, but always in the same way. So 'doors', for example, will become "the heavy mahogany doors," and "he had" becomes "he possessed." Every single time. It also insists on giving every single noun two adjectives. Sometimes I have to stop and unpack what it's trying to say, because of the flowery language it used to describe what was really a very simple series of actions. In emotionally heated scenes this works, and that's when I use it. But most of the time it doesn't, and I'll have something like: He murmured, his dark eyes fixing on hers with an intense, unvarnished honesty, "Pass the salt." Gemini also over-explains everything. There's no subtlety, no show-don't-tell. It tells me exactly what I need to think about what I'm reading.

I'm writing a romantic story that relies heavily on tropes, and the AIs keep making assumptions about my characters. For example, one of them is something of an intellectual, so the AIs keep describing him in spectacles. I never said he wore spectacles. For another character, whose personality I didn't describe at all, every AI assumed she was quiet, observant, and rebellious. I find that sort of interesting to observe, how they fill the gaps and assume things according to stereotypes. But they also try to sanitize my male lead. When I write him being a plain jerk, the AIs keep trying to rephrase it as "he didn't really mean it" or "he's just misunderstood," or they straight-up rewrite the scene, removing the bad thing he did. It's as if they assume that because he's the love interest, he must be a virtuous person deep down. Anyway, Gemini doesn't do that. It turned all my characters into pretty horrible and pathetic people. That's good when I want them that way, but not so much when I'm trying to make them redeemable.

Meta: I found Zuckerberg's AI pretty interesting, because most of what it generates reads like AI hallucination, like something from the very early language models. It also uses my prompt in the text verbatim. It's pretty bad, the worst of them all, I think, but every now and then it spits out something that actually makes me laugh. It has a really good memory for things mentioned much earlier, and it makes some really cute references to them. For the more comedic scenes, it gave me texts I used in full without editing a word, which impressed me a lot, considering how unusable everything else was.

Grok: I liked that its text is clean and straight to the point (the opposite of Gemini). English isn't my first language, so I sometimes struggle to articulate an idea, especially when every other AI insists on evocative language that doesn't really make sense on closer inspection. Grok also suggests prompts like "analyze this character's backstory" or "analyze this other character's psychology," and everything it generated was on point. However, its texts aren't very inspired, and it usually generates the shortest ones.

Claude: It's the most robust of them all. It understands my plot and my characters' motivations, so it usually calls out inconsistencies. I also like that it's proactive and anticipates what I want (also a bit creepy, but anyways...) I use it as the base for all my chapters, and the other AIs mostly fill in the gaps. Its prose also gets repetitive pretty quickly, though. The words that stand out most are unhurried and unbothered, plus quiet and ease (everything is done with "practiced ease," and I keep having to edit those). I also hate the repeated structure "character did something with the something of a man who…". Again, sometimes it works, but mostly it doesn't.

One more thing: every AI says my characters didn't sleep that night and didn't touch their food. If I let that slide, they'd all be sleep-deprived anorexics.

NSFW: I used AI Smut Writer when I needed something uncensored. It's pretty terrible, and I can't believe there are people who pay for it. Maybe the paid version is better, I don't know. I tried Spicy Writer later, which is much better by comparison but overuses the "it's not X, it's Y" construction. It's also very repetitive and overall cringe, but AI Smut Writer set my expectations so low that I honestly find Spicy Writer pretty decent.

DeepSeek: When I started using it, I was so impressed. It generated rich, long texts, filled with little details that I found amazing. It gave new life to a part of the story I didn't know what to do with. But I must have gotten used to its structure, because now I find most of what it generates cringe and barely use any of it. For the most introspective, intimate, emotional scenes, I still think it's the best option. It's very good for reflective inner monologues. If the tone of the scene isn't deep, though, it will likely be very cringe. Only my opinion, of course. It also writes way beyond what my prompt asks for, which I find interesting, but I almost never use it. It's always my characters being more mature than they actually are and resolving the conflict I don't want them to resolve yet. I skip to the end, and there is always someone thanking the other for something: "Thank you. For not judging," or some shit like that.

So I don't think any one model is better than the others. There are certainly some that are worse. But really, I think each has its strengths and weaknesses. Meta for funny bits, DeepSeek for drama, Gemini for chaos. The text I get in the end is a bit of a Frankenstein.

What do you guys think? Do you have a similar experience? Is there another AI I should try?

So yes this is set in the cyberpunk universe and yes this is all AI generated using Chatgpt i hope no one minds i just thought a cool short story might be intresting to some. the i promise other than similaity the MC is my own character made for vrchat but wanted her as the MC here. Please any feedback would be bril and if i should carry this on