Are we all just paying for AI features we'll never actually use?

[ethanmiller]

Been comparing AI video editors for a project and noticed something — half these platforms bury their best AI tools behind credit limits or higher tiers you might not even touch. Wanted to see what this community actually uses versus what you thought you needed.

A few questions I'm genuinely curious about:

Have you ever upgraded a plan for an AI feature (voice cloning, AI B-roll, generative extend, etc.) and then barely used it? What happened?
For those on DaVinci Resolve's free tier — is it actually "enough," or do you eventually hit a wall that pushes you toward Studio?
Text-based editing (Descript, Kapwing-style) sounds great in theory — does it hold up on messier footage, or only clean studio audio?

Would love to hear real workflows, not just marketing claims — drop your setup below. This breakdown is what sparked the question if you want a reference point:

[KayleighCurtis]

Totally get where you're coming from. I've upgraded some plans for fancy features like AI voice cloning, but honestly, I rarely use them after the initial try. As for DaVinci Resolve's free version, it’s pretty solid for most projects, but once you get into heavy color grading or advanced features, the Studio version is worth it. On the text-based editing side, I’ve found it works okay with cleaner footage, but messier clips tend to trip it up still a bit hit or miss compared to manual editing.

[amelia]

I’ve definitely seen this happen—AI features can look impressive during a demo but rarely justify a higher plan if they’re only used occasionally. For most creators, the free tier is enough until they hit specific limits. I’d rather pay for a tool that improves my regular workflow than for a long list of AI features I barely use.