Let me tell you about the moment OpenAI decided user experience didn't matter anymore.
In late 2025, Google's Gemini 3 was gaining ground fast. OpenAI executives panicked. They declared an internal "code red" - not because their users were suffering (though they were), but because their market share was slipping. And in that panic, they made a decision that would alienate millions of paying customers.
They rushed GPT-5.2 out the door. Unfinished. Untested. Unwanted.
The User Verdict Is In: It's Worse
GPT-5.2 launched in December 2025 with benchmark scores that should have meant celebration. Instead, it triggered one of the most divided receptions in AI history. Here's what actual users are saying:
"It's everything I hate about 5 and 5.1, but worse." - Reddit r/ChatGPT user, December 2025
"Too corporate, too 'safe'. A step backwards from 5.1." - Top comment in "so, how we feelin about 5.2?" thread
"I hate it. It's so... robotic. Boring." - Long-time ChatGPT Plus subscriber
The theme keeps appearing, over and over: boring. Users aren't just disappointed - they're describing an AI that's had its personality surgically removed.
What Actually Went Wrong
Here's the thing about GPT-5.2 that OpenAI doesn't want to talk about: they optimized for benchmarks, not for humans. The model crushes professional tests, but real users describe it as feeling like "a corporate bot" that's been through "compliance training and is scared to improvise."
Creative Writing Death
Writers report GPT-5.2 refuses more requests, hedges constantly, and produces bland, lifeless prose. For copywriting and creative work, the downgrade is obvious and painful.
Invented APIs
Developers report GPT-5.2 "sometimes improved structure but also invented APIs that didn't exist" - hallucinating entire software interfaces that cause hours of debugging.
Style Refusals
Users report: "Writing tone: 5.2 refused to adopt a style that 5.1 handled easily." The model won't do what previous versions did without issue.
Memory Failures
Custom instructions ignored. Context forgotten mid-conversation. Safety filters triggering on innocuous requests. The model feels broken.
The "Lobotomized Drone" Problem
One creative writer's description of GPT-5 perfectly captures what happened:
"Where GPT-4o could nudge me toward a more vibrant, emotionally resonant version of my own literary voice, GPT-5 sounds like a lobotomized drone." - Reddit user, August 2025
"Lobotomized drone." That's not angry hyperbole - it's an accurate description of what OpenAI did. They stripped personality, warmth, and conversational ability out of their model and replaced it with corporate blandness.
Users describe GPT-5.2 as "sterile" and "overly formal," lacking the subtle conversational warmth that made GPT-4o actually enjoyable to use. OpenAI claims they're building artificial general intelligence, but their latest model can't even maintain a convincing conversation.
The Benchmark Fraud
Here's where it gets infuriating. GPT-5.2's benchmark scores are impressive. OpenAI waves these numbers around like a trophy. But here's what those benchmarks actually measure: nothing users care about.
Benchmarks test narrow academic problems. They don't measure:
- Whether the AI is pleasant to talk to
- Whether it follows instructions consistently
- Whether it maintains personality across conversations
- Whether creative writers can use it productively
- Whether it refuses reasonable requests
OpenAI optimized for the test, not for the users. And users noticed immediately.
OpenAI's Own Admission
Here's the kicker: OpenAI's own system card openly mentions "regressions in certain modes." Translation: they know it's worse. They shipped it anyway. Why? Because Google was breathing down their neck and they panicked.
The "Code Red" That Broke Everything
According to reports, OpenAI declared "code red" in response to Google's AI advances. This competitive pressure led to what appears to be a premature release - shipping an "early checkpoint" rather than waiting for the complete model.
"Internal memos reveal GPT-5.2 was rushed despite known biases and risks in automated systems. Companies are building HR systems, customer service platforms and financial tools on a foundation with two fatal problems: the technology itself fails at the tasks it's automating, and most organizations cannot catch those failures before they harm people." - Built In analysis
This is what happens when a company stops prioritizing users and starts only caring about beating the competition. Users become acceptable casualties in a corporate chess match.
The Mass Exodus
Survey data from August 2025 showed 38% of former Plus subscribers cited cost concerns - not because $20/month was expensive, but because the product was no longer worth $20. When you pay for a premium product and get something worse than last month's free version, $20 feels like robbery.
"Cancelled the moment they muzzled GPT-5... Used to be so uncensored and so free. And now, one word and filters and censorships be flooding in." - User explaining subscription cancellation, October 2025
Trust Pilot shows a 2.1-star rating with complaints about "non-existent customer support" and billing issues. Users report AI support loops instead of human help, tickets unanswered for months, and no way to get problems resolved.
The Honest Assessment
Let me be direct: GPT-5.2 represents OpenAI's bet that professional work productivity matters more than user satisfaction. They've decided to optimize for enterprise sales and benchmark bragging rights, even if it means disappointing the users who made ChatGPT a household name.
The irony is brutal. OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit dedicated to ensuring AI benefits humanity. Now they're rushing half-baked products to market because Google scared them, while users suffer from worse responses, broken features, and a support system that doesn't support anyone.
If you're a GPT-5.2 user who's frustrated, know this: you're not crazy. You're not imagining things. The model is worse. OpenAI knows it's worse. And they shipped it anyway.
That tells you everything you need to know about their priorities.