A website built with AI can appear surprisingly quickly. That does not mean the first version is correct, and it certainly does not mean the result can be left unexamined. AIBuiltProjects.com developed through a series of visible mistakes, misunderstandings and repairs. Those moments are not separate from the project; they are one of the main reasons the project is worth documenting.
Most of the problems were not dramatic technical failures. They were decisions that looked plausible in isolation but did not match the way I wanted the site to work. AI could build what it believed I meant. My job was to compare that result with the actual purpose, identify the mismatch and explain the correction clearly enough for the next version to improve.
A Projects page that described the wrong thing
The earliest Projects page announced three projects and presented them as the foundation of the website. The problem was simple: I did not have only three projects. I had three categories of work—games, websites, and applications or tools—with multiple projects already belonging inside them.
The page therefore communicated a limit that did not exist. I replaced the fixed three-project concept with a category-based entrance. Gem Forge Idle and Swarmloom Idle could sit under games, GottaPics and AIBuiltProjects.com under websites, and Chaos Booth under applications. The correction made the structure expandable instead of forcing every new project into an outdated introduction.
Unnecessary sections such as “Approach” and “How We Build” also appeared during the first iterations. They sounded reasonable but did not help visitors reach the work. Removing them made the site more direct: explore the projects, open a parent page and follow the connected story.
The homepage changed after it had already looked right
One of the more frustrating moments came when the homepage no longer resembled the version I had approved. Text that had been positioned over images was separated from them, the images became much larger, cards no longer aligned properly and the page felt disordered.
I did not want a temporary repair that could disappear with the next theme change. The layout was rebuilt using stable WordPress blocks and controlled styling. Buttons were centred, text sizes were reduced after becoming too large, subtle contrasting shadows were added where headings disappeared into photographs, and the article grids were returned to a compact two-column presentation.
That experience established an important rule for later edits: preserve the page structure, use theme-compatible blocks and check the public result after saving. A successful response from an editing tool does not prove that the page looks right to a visitor.
Navigation existed, but the articles were still hidden
The Projects menu eventually displayed the individual project pages, which was useful, but it still did not solve article discovery. A visitor could open Gem Forge Idle, for example, without an obvious route to every post documenting its development.
A separate Blog tab and project categories solved that problem more cleanly than adding deeper and deeper menu levels. Parent pages explain the project; category archives list the related articles. The archives themselves also needed redesigning because their first version displayed complete posts one beneath another. With several long articles, the page behaved like an endless scroll of text. It was replaced with a card grid using featured images, dates and excerpts.
That repair exposed another issue: several posts used the same featured image. Even when the writing was different, the archive looked repetitive. The site now follows a stricter rule—use a different featured image whenever possible, and create a considered crop from a suitable screenshot when no separate landscape image exists.
The writing voice needed correction too
Some early text referred to “the owner” or described what “he” remembered. That was wrong for this website. I am writing the project record myself, so the natural form is first person: “I remember,” “I decided,” and “I changed.”
The correction was applied across pages and became a permanent writing rule. It sounds like a small editorial choice, but it changes the relationship with the reader. This is not an anonymous case study assembled about somebody else. It is my account of what I attempted and what happened.
Legal pages and technical housekeeping
Privacy policies for the games and Chaos Booth had originally been placed on GottaPics because AIBuiltProjects.com did not yet exist. Once the new site became the real home of those projects, the policies were copied here, checked for old GottaPics references and connected through a dedicated Game & App Legal area. The old versions stayed untouched until the replacement URLs were confirmed in the apps and platform listings.
Search setup also required attention. The Google verification tag needed a durable home that would not disappear during a theme update, and at one stage the XML sitemaps appeared empty. These were not glamorous parts of building the site, but they determined whether search engines could verify, crawl and understand it.
AI made the site possible much faster, but every useful improvement still began with a human noticing that something was wrong.
Why these mistakes belong in the public story
It would be easy to compress the history into a sentence saying that AI built the website. That would hide the most informative part. The site became usable because problems were noticed: the wrong structure, unstable presentation, weak navigation, repetitive imagery, incorrect narrative voice and incomplete technical setup.
AI accelerated the implementation and made ambitious changes possible without a conventional development team. It did not remove the need for judgment. In practice, the project worked because I kept comparing the output with the intention and refusing to keep elements simply because they had already been built.
The permanent AIBuiltProjects.com project page shows the current form of the website. This article preserves the less tidy route that led there. Future mistakes will be handled the same way: inspect them, repair them and document what they taught me instead of pretending the correct version appeared immediately.
Leave a Reply