Google Antigravity feels promising on the surface, but in real-world developer usage, it struggles with some of the most critical aspects of productivity.
The biggest issue is poor memory of project context. It frequently forgets file structures, previously shared code, and architectural decisions within the same session. This makes it difficult to build anything non-trivial because you end up re-explaining the same context repeatedly.
Another major limitation is weak understanding of reusability and patterns. When you try to enforce coding rules, reusable components, or architectural constraints, the model often ignores them or applies them inconsistently across responses.
It also struggles with maintaining conversation rules and constraints. Even when you clearly define guidelines (e.g., “always use this structure”, “never do X”, “follow these conventions”), it tends to drift over time, which breaks workflows that depend on consistency.
In short, while it may be okay for quick questions, it’s not reliable for serious development work where memory, structure, and long-term context actually matter.
Final Verdict: Good for casual use. Frustrating for real engineering workflows. Claude code is much better than antigravity giving the best work for long engineering workflows
Antigravity not worth the money as better things Claude Code is providing for almost same price