Author: nopetnoget editors ·
For people who are engaged in text-to-video generation and use popular AI models, but the project has no distinctive identity and looks like another generative project with AI repackaged in its own prompt form. Positioning as Free AI Video Generator: Create High-Quality Videos with AI – does not justify expectations, token purchase is required immediately to generate. I was unable to access the service after deleting my own account. The prompt form sometimes produces errors like is null. It remains unclear what the advantage of this service is? I was unable to test the actual quality and speed of generation, the controllability of the process without purchasing tokens (subscribing).
Verdict: 3/10. Personally, I would not choose VideoWeb AI. There was no answer to the question "why"? Why this particular service, what are the advantages? Plus, I wasn't even able to try it. First, what to do: Fix is null errors. Rework onboarding, simplify pricing, and provide the ability for a free trial.
Step 1
First impression: Discover Video & Image AI Tools in VideoWeb AI – the project uses AI (Seedance) to generate videos from text. The emphasis is on the ability to choose from several Seedance models or Google Veo.
Step 2
Registration as usual for such projects, via Google. On first login, it offers to log in / register via native browser popup. Overall, there were no questions with registration on the project, the flow is transparent and logical. Perhaps only the fact that the authorization form itself is a popup, it immediately offers to enter a password and email, it makes sense to emphasize Google authorization, and only if the client refuses, offer email login.
Step 3
After registration, it simply redirects to a page with a generation form and a block of generated videos as examples. The interface is very familiar for projects in this segment, but lacks quality onboarding and emphasis on the generation form itself. There are many small control elements, it feels like this is a Boeing 777, not just a text input field and a create video button, this can slightly slow down the user from performing the target action and spend several minutes figuring out the interface.
Step 4
You won't be able to try generating a video based on your prompt without topping up your balance. 1 generation will cost 500 star-tokens, while your account is given 60 at start. You'll have to trust the videos that are already in the project library as examples of system capabilities. This, in my opinion, is a minus, it's better to inform about this openly, the service immediately offers to top up the balance before generation. At the same time, when you click on the 500 generation button and your account only has 60 – nothing happens, no action and no message. At first I thought nothing was working at all. This needs to be fixed, and also think about test generation of the first video. I understand that generation is not cheap, here you need to count the further funnel and unit at such onboarding of new users. Time: 1:05
Step 5
No, you won't be able to verify. Even when you set up some no-name model for generation, you can get an error message "Cannot invoke "com.xxq.ai.draw.domain.Platform.getId()" because "platform" is null" – because the platform is null. This is a super "repulsive" factor, it's worth either making human error messages or not allowing them to appear in the first place.
Step 6
The free plan doesn't even start.
Step 7
Next to your balance in the top menu is a direct link to the pricing page. The first plan at 9.99$ per month gives you 5000 credits – tokens, which will allow you to generate up to 10 videos on popular AI models, because we remember 1 video costs 500. Thus the cost of 1 video is about 1$. When paying per year, it will be 70 cents. Also if you choose a plan for 49.99$ the price of 1 video is ~ 70 cents. But when you scroll the pricing page – there's information overload, a lot is written in small text, it's tiring and doesn't give a simple understanding of how much generation will cost me. It is recommended to rework the page by simplifying pricing and the description of what's included and what affects token spending.
Step 8
I was able to delete the account in two clicks. Everything is fine here, if the goal is exactly for the client to exit the project user base. Neither offers to stay, nor a deletion period, nor a notification to the registration email, with a pre-sale or promo retention. This is a significant minus, you need to think through customer exit / user with an attempt to "sell" the product.
Focus 1
Many "small" elements, you have to choose something, click somewhere, figure out that you need to buy tokens. This service is not about "quick start" for a new user, not about free trial of first videos, and not about gradual immersion in the service logic itself. If you really want it or really need it, you can find your way to "value". To the founder: The project requires more careful attention to user flow. You need to review onboarding, convey the benefits, and still think about "try for free".
Focus 2
I didn't figure it out, everything I understood is 0.7-1$ - 1 video, to use it you need to get a subscription, the minimum monthly rate with monthly payment is 9.99$. The project promotes Veo and Seedance models. To the founder: Complicated, unpredictable, the pricing page is overloaded. A large number of plans is off-putting. Simplify, reduce the number of plans.
Focus 3
I was unable to verify, you have to buy tokens immediately. To the founder: Consider the possibility of a free trial for at least 1 video generation.
