The appearance fields shape a generator prompt. The personality fields shape every conversation you will ever have. People fill in the first and skip the second.
Every character creator in this category presents as a single form, and behind it there are two unrelated mechanisms.
The appearance fields β hair, build, age band, style, clothing β are assembled into a prompt that goes to the image model. They affect what gets generated and nothing else. They have no influence on how the character talks.
The personality fields β traits, backstory, occupation, relationship, speaking style β are assembled into a system prompt that sits invisibly in front of every message for the rest of the character's life. They affect everything about the conversation and nothing about the images.
Knowing which side of the form you are on tells you how much care a field deserves, and the honest summary is that the second half is where the product actually is.
Appearance is easy to change later, on every platform here. It is also, on most of them, only loosely binding β the generator drifts, and the same settings produce visibly different faces across sessions unless the platform anchors generation to a saved definition.
Candy AI is the notable exception and it is why it scores 8.7 on images while several higher-quality generators score lower on usefulness: it holds a character's face across sessions better than anything else here. If you want a recurring person rather than a stream of images, that consistency is worth more than a point of raw quality.
Everywhere else, treat appearance as a starting position rather than a decision.
The consistent mistake is treating the traits field as a wishlist. Ten adjectives produce a character that is none of them, because a system prompt asking for warm, sarcastic, shy, confident, playful and serious resolves into an average, and the average of everything is nothing.
Three traits that are in tension with each other produce a far better character than ten that agree. Guarded but curious is a person. Warm, kind, caring and sweet is a customer service voice.
Speaking style is underused and disproportionately effective. Short sentences, rarely asks questions is a more powerful instruction than any number of personality adjectives, because it changes the shape of every reply rather than its content.
Most creators have something like a backstory, goals or motivation field, and it is the one people leave blank because it takes actual writing.
It is also the field that determines whether there is anything on the other side of the conversation. A character with a want β something it is trying to do, something it is avoiding, something it disagrees with you about β has a reason to introduce topics. A character without one can only respond, and a companion that can only respond is exactly the flat, mirroring surface that makes week three feel empty.
Two sentences here does more for the next thirty days than an hour spent on appearance sliders. This is the single highest-leverage thing in the entire setup process and it is the one every platform makes optional.
SweetDream AI and Janitor AI both score 8.8 on customization, at opposite ends of the category. SweetDream AI has the most granular structured creator here β a long form with a lot of controls. Janitor AI has almost no form at all and instead lets you write the character definition directly, which is more powerful and much less guided.
Kindroid at 8.7 and OurDream AI at 8.6 sit just behind, both with structured creators that include real personality depth rather than an adjective picker. CrushOn AI at 8.5 and Seduced AI at 8.3 follow.
At the other end, Replika scores 6.0. It is the least customizable product still actively developed here, and that is a deliberate design choice rather than an oversight β it wants to give you a character rather than let you build one.
Appearance: fast, roughly, and expect to revisit it. It is the part you can change.
Traits: three, at least two of which pull against each other.
Speaking style: one concrete instruction about length or rhythm.
Backstory: two sentences containing one thing the character wants and one thing it will not do.
Then leave it alone for a week before editing. Every edit to a system prompt changes the character mid-relationship, and constant tuning is its own way of never letting one become a person.
Decide which single thing you care most about, then optimise for that and accept the trade-off everywhere else. Platforms in this category are not general-purpose: the ones with the best conversation have weak image generation, and the ones with the best images forget who you are after two weeks. Trying to find one that leads in everything wastes money on subscriptions you cancel. Start with a free tier that actually lets you judge output β Janitor AI, CrushOn AI and PornPen all have real ones.
Because most image generation is prompt-to-image with no persistent identity β each generation is independent, so faces drift. Companion platforms that tie generations to a stored character definition do much better at this: Candy AI holds a character across sessions notably well. Dedicated generators like SoulGen and PornPen are stronger per-image but weaker at keeping one character recognisable over time.
We signed up to all fourteen platforms without paying. Three free tiers are genuinely usable, most are demos that stop exactly where it gets interesting, and two platforms have nothing at all.
Read postFive of fourteen ship a real mobile app, and the reason is app store policy rather than engineering. What you actually lose in the browser, and why an icon on your home screen is a disclosure.
Read postEvery platform in this category calls itself uncensored and every one of them refuses things. Here is where refusals actually come from, which limits are permanent, and what the word is worth when you see it on a pricing page.
Read post
