SIGNATURE CAMPAING - đź“Ł- We don't require a WEEKLY rate limit for 3.5 Flash on the Pro Plan!

Google Antigravity
, ,
1

Please read the comments on this thread carefully.

Everyone with a Pro plan is trying to develop something.

  • No one paying will want to wait a week.
  • Semi-professional developers won’t want to pay for high-priced subscription plans.

You can’t both emphasize how cheap 3.5 Flash is at your launch and then restrict us with unacceptably high weekly quotas. That would be hypocrisy.

If there’s a weekly limit, I’m out.

I’m not going to sit around and wait a week to continue developing.

Many threads and comments have been opened about this. All you’ve done is give a 3x quota. This isn’t enough. It was already unacceptable for a 5-hour quota to run out in one prompt. Giving this doesn’t justify a weekly quota.

:pushpin: Rest assured, many people will prefer the slower-responding Gemini 3 Flash with its 5-hour data quotas.

:backhand_index_pointing_right: Please consider the comments under this thread. Or, it’s up to you.

You can think of this as a signature campaign.

Even just writing +1 in the comments is enough to show your reaction.
It indicates that you agree with what’s written here and that you feel similarly.

:megaphone: Remove the weekly quota limit.

:cross_mark: We don’t want a weekly quota!

2

+1, i also want the gemini 3 flash usage back

3

+1, This current system is completely unfair, you can’t develop anything with it. At most, you can describe a website to it, for example, and it might be enough for that, but we all know that won’t make the website finished or usable.

I’m of the opinion that we need at least an 8x increase and a 3x, 5 hour reset after the 6 day weekly reset; even that would be worth more than what we have now. I’m certainly not going to renew my subscription, and I’d rather not bother with this lame AI thing anymore after all this, I truly hope that bubble finally bursts.

4

They’re having issues with the API due to heavy traffic; they’ll be removing the problematic limits soon.

5

I agree with this.

However, this is simply the direction Google has been moving with this crap already and all we get commenting about it is hand waving, copy-pasted PR BS. They’ve had a weekly refresh on Antigravity for three months now, and it used to be bearable because you had separate limits in Gemini CLI but now they are taking that away for the currently excessively far behind in features and functionality AGY CLI that shares the crappy quota system with Antigravity.

It’s frustrating because there really is no way to show our actual dissatisfaction. With other providers, we would just cancel but Google AI is tangled up in too many other features and services and so we can’t just excise the AI if their changes don’t work for us. But I am very, very, very disappointed with their changes.

6

+1 If you were good with the prompt engineering, Flash 3 was very efficient. Those same highly engineered prompts are very inefficient with Flash 3.5.

7

:+1:

I also agree! I don’t get the point in choosing between pro and flash models, if they take all from the same quota pool. By that, I would ever take the best model possible.
Before, I used the Flash model very frequently and kept the Pro model quotas for the more complex stuff.

Google: Please, give us the 5-hour refresh for the flash models back. And make your quota system/calculation fully transparent!

Using Antigravity-Models feels like driving a car, where you don’t know, how much fuel you would actually need to drive from point A to point B. And it randomly changes every time. Nobody would buy/drive a car, where the fuel consumption is not calculable.

8

They bloat the tiers with things we dont ask for like storage, and notebookllm, and nanobanana, and “look! you can make horrible music with your AI now!”, GOOGLE HOME! YAY! WE ALL LOVE GOOGLE HOME! (sarcasm). Then limit what we actually want which was agentic coding. They dont offer any plan for what we actually want which is Antigravity. Google has officially made all its tiers expensive bloat.

9

Yeah, that’s also such a point, I don’t get: I don’t make videos or music or such stuff. (For such things, I often play around with local models on my computer just for fun.)
So, theoretically there should be more than enough quotas left for the Antigravity models. It’s beyond me, how googles capacity distribution is handled. They should scale their capacities properly based on what each user actually needs.

10

+1 it is unacceptable

11

Ditto

+1

This is absolutely embarrassing googlers

-- Josh

12

Its pretty much a marketing trick. They offer plans with a bunch of tools that are hardly ever used to justify the cost of the subscription, and then cut you off on what you actually use. This way they can still claim they deliver value. It’s just that the “value” has shifted to things that have no real cost to them.

Every one here is mad cause we all use agents. And they capped agent use, but their justification is that we have so many other “great benefits” and the value of your pro membership is being split between those other benefits you never use. Therefore now you generate no cost to the company since you dont use the other tools, and the tools you do use no longer have higher costs cause you got limited by the “added value” the useless tools you do have at your dispossal “provide”. Lol. some one at google feels super big brain right now.

13

+1 Bring Back Gemini 3 Flash

14

+1

back gemini 3 flash,
or increase quotas!

thank you, Antigravity Team.

15

+1
Really disappointed.

16

+1 I’ve already done with Antigravity — but still keeping a little hope

17

+1

I hope they realize they need to restore everything before it’s too late.

Once we leave, it will be really hard to regain our trust..

18

image
image882Ă—611 21.5 KB

Ha-ha, guys who also have deadlines and shoud finish project during next days? :smiley:

19

+1. I fully agree, and I support a clear separation of quotas between the Flash and Pro models.

We understand that model improvements are part of the market. If the goal is to provide better, more capable, and more advanced models, that is fine — we all want the product to evolve. The issue is not the improvement itself. The issue is changing the quota system abruptly, confusingly, and seemingly arbitrarily, without clear communication, predictability, or an objective explanation for paying users.

Right now, it feels like customers were surprised by a structural change in the product without enough transparency about the new limits, the actual quota consumption of each model, and the relationship between Flash, Pro, and the reset behavior we previously had.

For many of us, Antigravity is not just an experimental tool or a curiosity. It is a working tool. When quotas change without clarity, it directly affects productivity, planning, and trust in the platform.

The request is simple: we want transparent quotas, real separation between Flash and Pro models, and a predictable reset model similar to what we had before. If the goal is to monetize the platform better, create intermediate plans between Pro and Ultra. I am confident many users would be willing to gradually upgrade to higher tiers, as long as there is clarity, predictability, and respect for the existing customer base.

What is not acceptable is turning a model improvement into a loss of control for the user. Improving the product should not mean reducing the trust of the people who already pay for it and rely on it every day.

20

+1. The PRO plan no longer qualifies as a professional offering.