description: "From $0.002 to $0.09 per image, across 12 models. How we built a prompt pattern that actually produces usable game art, and a model-picking strategy that keeps costs at $8/month."
og_description: "12 fal.ai models, $0.002-$0.09/image, 4-layer prompt pattern. Game art that actually ships."
excerpt: "We generate all visual assets for our game through fal.ai — concept art, icons, logos, trailer frames. Here's the 4-layer prompt pattern that actually works, and how we pick between 12 models spanning two orders of magnitude in cost."
Every visual asset in our game — character art, app icons, trailer frames, logo variants, Steam capsules — was generated through a single API. No Photoshop. No concept artist on staff. Last month: 673 images, $8.30 total. Here's the prompt pattern that makes AI art actually usable for game development, and how we pick between 12 models spanning $0.002 to $0.09 per image.
Most AI-generated images look beautiful on social media and useless in a game. The character looks different from every angle. The art style drifts between generations. The text in the logo is garbled. The icon doesn't read at 64×64.
The issue isn't the models — Flux, Ideogram, and Recraft are genuinely good. The issue is prompting. "Warrior on a beach" gives you a different art style, different skin tone, different proportions every time. You can't build a game from one-offs.
We spent three months iterating before we found a prompt structure that anchors the model to a consistent art direction and produces images you can actually ship. It has four layers.
Same paragraph whether you're generating a character, a landscape, or an icon. It's your art bible compressed into 50 words. Every time we skipped it — "just a quick test" — the output drifted into generic fantasy art.
Not "tribal clothing" — "woven wrap skirt, mid-thigh length." Not "jewelry" — "shell necklace with a carved bone pendant." Vague prompts produce vague results. Specific prompts produce usable assets. Describe element by element.
When you need the same character from different angles, pass the first approved image as reference. Without it, every generation is independent — a different person every time. With it, every generation builds on the last approved output. This is how you get a roster of characters that look like they belong in the same game.
A full session — blank canvas to final assets — costs under $0.20. Most of the creative work happens at $0.003/image. The expensive model just polishes a decision you already made.
Every model except Ideogram fails at text. Flux gives you beautiful art with garbled letters. SDXL doesn't try. If your image has words in it, Ideogram v3 Quality is the only answer. We learned to accept the $0.09 cost rather than waste $0.30 on ten failed Flux attempts.
Our game logo has 18 material variants — mahogany, mother-of-pearl, obsidian, molten lava, bronze with verdigris. Each generated with Nano Banana Edit ($0.039) + BiRefNet ($0.001) for transparency. Total: $0.72. A designer would quote hundreds of dollars and a week.
**The design context block is worth more than the rest of the prompt combined.** Without it, every image is a one-off. With it, every image belongs to the same game.
**Never iterate on expensive models.** Schnell at $0.003/image is for exploration. Flux 2 Pro at $0.03 is for final output. The cheap model does 90% of the creative work.
**Aggregation beats loyalty.** No single model is best at everything. Flux for art, Ideogram for text, Recraft for design, Nano Banana for edits, BiRefNet for masks. Use the right tool for each job.
**Let the agent handle prompting.** We encode the 4-layer pattern, art style guide, and model selection rules in an [agent skill file](../skills/image-generation.md). The AI writes the full prompt, generates images, displays them, and asks for scores. The human's job is creative direction.
AI art isn't magic and it isn't free. But at a penny per image, with the right prompt structure and model strategy, it eliminates the most expensive bottleneck in indie game development: the gap between "I know what this should look like" and "I have an asset I can actually use."
*Image generation is built into [Tinqs Studio](https://tinqs.com). We've open-sourced the [prompt engineering skill](../skills/image-generation.md) and [concept art pipeline skill](../skills/concept-art-pipeline.md). We're building [Ariki](https://arikigame.com) with these tools.*
