Vibe Coding: 80% Hype. 20% Fight.
LinkedIn, YouTube and co. are full of it. An app in five minutes. A complete backend in two hours. Everything runs, everything shines, everyone is excited. What comes after that, nobody shows.
What is vibe coding?
Vibe coding refers to the approach of developing software by describing in natural language to an AI what you want to build, and taking the generated code directly without fully understanding it. Tools like Cursor, Claude or GitHub Copilot make this possible. The pace is impressive. First results come in minutes.
The 80/20 principle applies here too. The first 80 percent genuinely build fast. A solid frontend in five minutes, a database structure in twenty. The remaining 20 percent, edge cases, clean state management, performance, error handling, are often real prompt wrestling. Iteration by iteration. Each one costs money.
What LinkedIn posts and YouTube videos show: the perfectly staged happy path. What they do not show: what happens after.
Three signs that vibe coding is becoming a problem.
We see these situations in almost every vibe coding project that runs into trouble.
Nobody understands their own code
The code runs. Nobody has really understood it. As long as everything works that is not a problem. At the first serious bug in production it becomes a nightmare, even for experienced developers. It is like finishing a house that someone else started, without blueprints.
The result: Debugging becomes guesswork. Every change can break something else.
Integration into existing systems breaks
AI is fantastic at building self-contained code. When integrating into existing system landscapes it often loses the thread. Cross-system architecture, scalability, complex database interactions: the bird’s-eye view is missing.
The result: What worked perfectly in isolation no longer works in the real context.
Token costs grow out of control
A first app builds quickly and costs stay manageable. As soon as the last 20 percent needs to be implemented, every iteration step costs money. Several rounds of prompt wrestling for one edge case adds up fast.
The result: Projects that start cheaply become more expensive than expected when complexity grows.
Why do so many vibe coding projects fail after launch?
The most common mistake: treating vibe coding as a replacement for technical understanding rather than a tool that amplifies technical understanding.
Garbage in, bullshit out. Vague instructions produce inefficient, bloated code that quietly burns resources in the background. Those who have built software themselves know what matters and can prompt more precisely. Those who cannot get code that works, but in a way nobody expected.
Then there is the maintenance trap. When version 2.0 arrives and features need to be added, when the data model changes and migrations become necessary, when something breaks in production: that is when you find out whether the foundation holds. Getting database migrations cleanly into production is a real challenge even for experienced developers. For code nobody fully understands it is a nightmare.
And then there are data security and stability in production. Topics that do not appear in the happy path video.
Who is vibe coding actually right for?
Vibe coding is an extraordinary tool. But not a replacement for architectural thinking, rather an accelerator for those who bring it.
Those who can code use vibe coding to build faster what they would have built slowly. Those who cannot code use it to build things they could not have built otherwise. Both are legitimate. But the second case requires more caution.
For prototypes, internal tools, proof of concepts: excellent. For production systems that need to scale, be maintained and extended: only with the right foundation underneath.
The bird’s-eye view is missing from AI. It builds well what you tell it. But it does not see the whole picture. Those who see the whole picture can use vibe coding for what it is: a powerful tool in the right hands.
Built fast. Regretted slowly.
A team rebuilds an internal process with vibe coding in two weeks. Looks good, runs stable. Three months later a new feature needs to be added. The data model needs updating. Nobody on the team has really understood the code.
What follows: days of debugging, inexplicable side effects, a developer who wants to start from scratch. The project that was built in two weeks takes four weeks to repair.
- No understanding of the code left behind
- Database structure not documented
- No tests, no error handling for edge cases
- First extension breaks unexpected parts of the system
- Token costs exploded through repeated prompt wrestling
- Stability problems appeared in production
“Vibe coding is like a turbo. Those who know how to drive get there faster. Those who do not get to the wall faster.”
What you usually ask us about vibe coding.
Not necessarily, but it helps enormously. Those who understand software development can prompt more precisely, spot problems earlier and assess the generated code better. Without this background knowledge the results are often still impressive, but the risks tend to be underestimated.
For systems that need to scale, process sensitive data, integrate complexly with other systems or be maintained long-term. Not because vibe coding is fundamentally impossible there, but because the requirements for architecture and understanding increase significantly.
The first results are often surprisingly affordable. The last 20 percent, edge cases, performance, clean integration, can become token-intensive and time-consuming. Add ongoing costs when the system is extended.
Yes, and that is often the best strategy. Vibe coding for fast iterations and first versions, classic development for critical architecture decisions, database design and everything that needs to be maintained long-term.
VIBE CODING CAN BE POWERFUL. WITH THE RIGHT FOUNDATION UNDERNEATH.
If you want to know whether your vibe coding project has a solid foundation or where the risks are, talk to us.