Compare/Figma AI Auto-Layout Suggestions & Content Fill vs Makko AI

AI tool comparison

Figma AI Auto-Layout Suggestions & Content Fill vs Makko AI

Which one should you ship with? Here is the side-by-side panel verdict, pricing read, reviewer split, and community vote comparison.

F

Design & Creative

Figma AI Auto-Layout Suggestions & Content Fill

Figma's AI fills your designs with real content and fixes your layouts

Ship

100%

Panel ship

Community

Free

Entry

Figma has moved its AI-powered auto-layout suggestions and content fill features to general availability for all paid plans. The tools analyze visual context to automatically populate designs with realistic placeholder content — names, avatars, product descriptions — and recommend responsive auto-layout configurations for existing frame structures. It's an incremental but meaningful upgrade baked directly into the design tool most teams already use.

M

Creative AI

Makko AI

Describe it, ship it — 2D game art and playable games with zero drawing or code

Ship

75%

Panel ship

Community

Free

Entry

Makko AI is an end-to-end AI game studio for 2D games. Describe your concept and it generates characters, backgrounds, and animations that stay visually consistent through its 'Collections' system — set the art style once, every asset inherits it. Then use Code Studio to assemble those assets into a playable game, still without writing code. Launched April 20 on Product Hunt with a free tier.

Decision
Figma AI Auto-Layout Suggestions & Content Fill
Makko AI
Panel verdict
Ship · 4 ship / 0 skip
Ship · 3 ship / 1 skip
Community
No community votes yet
No community votes yet
Pricing
Included with Figma paid plans — Starter (free, limited), Professional $15/mo, Organization $45/mo, Enterprise $75/mo
Free tier / Paid
Best for
Figma's AI fills your designs with real content and fixes your layouts
Describe it, ship it — 2D game art and playable games with zero drawing or code
Category
Design & Creative
Creative AI

Reviewer scorecard

Designer
78/100 · ship

Content Fill solves a genuinely tedious design problem — replacing 'Lorem ipsum' and grey boxes with contextually appropriate data so you can actually evaluate a layout instead of imagining it. The auto-layout suggestions are the more interesting feature: they surface the right constraint choices (fixed vs. hug vs. fill) in context, which is where most designers lose time. The specific decision that earns the ship here is that both features operate in-place without breaking the existing frame structure — Figma clearly thought about integration, not replacement.

No panel take
Creator
74/100 · ship

Content Fill produces contextually aware placeholder data — realistic names, plausible product copy, appropriately sized images — which is meaningfully better than the lorem ipsum placeholder era. The taste layer is thin but present: the tool infers from component naming and visual structure what kind of content belongs where, so a card labeled 'user profile' gets a name and avatar, not a product description. The fingerprint problem is real though: all AI-filled content reads like the same anonymous stock internet, so the editing surface still matters, and right now iteration beyond 'regenerate' is limited.

80/100 · ship

As someone who's spent hours fighting style inconsistency in AI art, the Collections system is genuinely elegant. You describe your world once, and everything generated after that respects it. The pipeline from concept to playable prototype is smoother than anything I've tried before.

Skeptic
71/100 · ship

This is the rare case where an AI feature earns its place by being embedded at the exact point of friction — designers have been manually hunting for placeholder content and hand-tuning auto-layout constraints since both features shipped, so the job-to-be-done is real and the integration is correct. The scenario where it breaks is complex design systems with heavily customized component variants, where the AI suggestions either miss the constraint logic entirely or conflict with existing tokens. What kills it in 12 months isn't a competitor — it's Figma itself shipping this deeper into the Dev Mode and variables workflow, making the current GA feel like a stepping stone.

45/100 · skip

The output style range is limited and professional studios won't touch it — the assets look obviously AI-generated. 'No coding required' games will also hit a complexity ceiling fast. It's a toy for prototyping, not a real game development pipeline.

PM
76/100 · ship

The job-to-be-done is precise: get a design from empty skeleton to reviewable mock without manual data wrangling. Content Fill nails this in under two minutes for standard component structures — you select frames, invoke fill, and the design becomes legible to stakeholders immediately. The product is opinionated in the right direction: it doesn't ask you to configure a content schema, it infers from context. The gap that keeps this from a stronger score is that auto-layout suggestions still require the designer to accept or reject each recommendation individually, which adds friction in bulk-layout scenarios — a 'apply to all similar frames' affordance is conspicuously absent.

No panel take
Builder
No panel take
80/100 · ship

The Collections consistency system is the real innovation here — every other AI art tool gives you one-off images that don't look like they belong together. For game jam prototyping or solo indie dev, this compresses weeks of art work into hours. Genuinely useful.

Futurist
No panel take
80/100 · ship

The game development market is about to be flooded with content from people who previously had zero path to shipping. Tools like Makko collapse the skill floor so dramatically that the question shifts from 'can I make a game' to 'what game should I make.' That's a cultural shift.

Weekly AI Tool Verdicts

Get the next comparison in your inbox

New AI tools ship daily. We compare them before you waste an afternoon.

Bookmarks

Loading bookmarks...

No bookmarks yet

Bookmark tools to save them for later