Very interesting. Its exactly why I tend to look at Game UI for inspiration as a Product Designer. They are free from the design rules we follow over and over, and tend to be much more creative when it comes to system understanding and responses it can give to user. Great article ☺️
User interfaces will change because data is going to become something more akin to liquid than blocks.
The implications of this extend through traditional product spaces (what is the internet when a WordPress site can write its own content and code?) to emergent spaces (are all video games now dream engines for AI agents?)
The idea is great in theory and I've been hearing about those dynamic UI/UX from my managers at work for some time. It's a little tricky in practice. First of all, it's expensive. I have a text game with AI and I recently added dynamically generated avatars and illustrations. A set of avatars costs me $0.1, and yet, this doubled my spendings on free users. It is also slow and unreliable. Not everything AI generates is nice and great. This is the reason I do my designs in Claude Design instead of Claude Code - the later sucks most of the time when I need consistency and good UX advises. There is also a huge problem with keeping a secret data in secret when you let users decide on their UI/UX - AI can reveal something it shouldn't.
So, it all needs some practical examples. But the idea is good and it's most likely coming soon. Just need to sort our few technical details.
My belief is that Ambiant Dynamic doesn't mean complex, or individualized. I think it can be simpler than that: imagine an Ikea product page, my first action is to move the hero carousel to the diagram image with the dimensions, then my second action is to open the dropdown with the measurements. The next product I visit should show me the measurements at the top of the page. The UXer gave "points" to the different elements in the page and mapped how the system reacts (liquid/malleable UI) and what triggered it. It evolves as I navigate. Not because the designers planned all the options (infinite, costly design) but because it decided what to react to and how.
You are right, it makes no sence to create as many design options as users. That's why I am talking systems.
Generative UI! Let's go. The state management in a game is a level up (great pun...) from websites but this is yet another differentiation between pre- and post-AI development.
Very interesting. Its exactly why I tend to look at Game UI for inspiration as a Product Designer. They are free from the design rules we follow over and over, and tend to be much more creative when it comes to system understanding and responses it can give to user. Great article ☺️
i actually used your article with codex to help improve my games UI!
Wholesome! Please share the results.
https://github.com/percy-raskova/babylon/tree/dev
User interfaces will change because data is going to become something more akin to liquid than blocks.
The implications of this extend through traditional product spaces (what is the internet when a WordPress site can write its own content and code?) to emergent spaces (are all video games now dream engines for AI agents?)
Dream engines is such a nice concept!
The idea is great in theory and I've been hearing about those dynamic UI/UX from my managers at work for some time. It's a little tricky in practice. First of all, it's expensive. I have a text game with AI and I recently added dynamically generated avatars and illustrations. A set of avatars costs me $0.1, and yet, this doubled my spendings on free users. It is also slow and unreliable. Not everything AI generates is nice and great. This is the reason I do my designs in Claude Design instead of Claude Code - the later sucks most of the time when I need consistency and good UX advises. There is also a huge problem with keeping a secret data in secret when you let users decide on their UI/UX - AI can reveal something it shouldn't.
So, it all needs some practical examples. But the idea is good and it's most likely coming soon. Just need to sort our few technical details.
My belief is that Ambiant Dynamic doesn't mean complex, or individualized. I think it can be simpler than that: imagine an Ikea product page, my first action is to move the hero carousel to the diagram image with the dimensions, then my second action is to open the dropdown with the measurements. The next product I visit should show me the measurements at the top of the page. The UXer gave "points" to the different elements in the page and mapped how the system reacts (liquid/malleable UI) and what triggered it. It evolves as I navigate. Not because the designers planned all the options (infinite, costly design) but because it decided what to react to and how.
You are right, it makes no sence to create as many design options as users. That's why I am talking systems.
Generative UI! Let's go. The state management in a game is a level up (great pun...) from websites but this is yet another differentiation between pre- and post-AI development.
Great breakdown.