Slides created by Gamma 5 were subpar, they were simply verbose and no creativity. I had to get the slides created again on classic generator.
Nik Payne (Gamma design)
Hey Ankit Agrawal, thanks for calling this out. Totally fair if Gamma 5 is giving you verbose, samey slides and you have to fall back to the classic generator.
Quick couple questions so I can pass something actionable to the team:
1) What kind of deck were you trying to make (pitch, lesson, internal update, etc) and what “creative” outcome were you hoping for (more visuals, punchier copy, more varied layouts, stronger theme)?
2) When you say verbose, was it mostly the slide text itself, the speaker-style narration, or the overall number of slides it generated?
Reply
Ankit Agrawal
Hey Nik Payne (Gamma design), I was trying to create a pitch deck as a business consultant to present my findings and recommended next actions.
I provided the entire content slide-by-slide, but the result was basically just plain text placed onto slides. There was zero creativity, no images, no visual hierarchy, and it was actually confusing to look at because there was no clear differentiation between the different points.
I’ve seen Gamma’s text-based slides, and even those look beautiful because they use things like font colors, accent boxes, visual hierarchy, and varied layouts.
I love Gamma because it usually takes just a couple of clicks to turn my content into a gorgeous deck.
So I switched to the Classic Generator, copied the exact same text, and guess what? It generated a gorgeous deck without any extra effort from my side.
I’m attaching a few slides side-by-side for comparison, Gamma 5 on the right and Classic on the left. You can clearly see the difference. Both were generated with just one click using exactly the same content.
I request that the data in these slides remains confidential
.
If I’m using Gamma 5 incorrectly, I’d genuinely like to understand what I’m doing wrong. But if that’s the case, it also suggests that Gamma 5 may be confusing for someone who is already used to the Classic workflow.
That’s ultimately what I’m trying to understand: the content wasn’t the problem. The difference seems to be in how the two generators interpret and visually present the exact same content.
Photo Viewer
View photos in a modal