Monster Hunter Wilds Standard Edition $70 on console | Get Steam key for $57.39 Preorder at Amazon Preorder at Walmart Preorder at Best Buy Monster Hunter Wilds Steelbook Edition $75 Preorder at Amazon Preorder at Walmart Preorder at Best Buy Preorder at Target The next entry in Capcom's wildly popular Monster Hunter series is just a few short weeks away. Monster Hunter Wilds releases on PS5, Xbox Series X|S, and PC on February 28. Fans have multiple editions to choose from, including the Monster Hunter Wilds Steelbook Edition for $75--just five bucks more than the standard edition. You can preorder either of the physical editions for console at Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy, and other major retailers. A pair of higher priced digital editions will also be available at launch, and all versions of Monster Hunter Wilds come with in-game preorder bonuses.Heads up for PC players: Though you can't get the steelbook case with your preorder, you can save big on Monster Hunter Wilds at Fanatical. The PC digital storefront is taking preorders for Steam keys for all three digital editions: standard, deluxe, and premium deluxe. You'll save 18% on your Monster Hunter Wilds Steam preorder with this deal, which equates to roughly $13 for standard, $16 for Deluxe, and $20 for Premium Deluxe.Monster Hunter Wilds Preorder Deal at Fanatical (Steam Keys)Continue Reading at GameSpot

Killing Floor 3 Standard Edition $40 Preorder at Best Buy Preorder at Walmart Preorder at GameStop Killing Floor 3 Deluxe Edition $60 Preorder at PS Store Preorder at Xbox Store Wishlist at Fanatical Killing Floor 3 Elite Nightfall Edition $80 Preorder at PS Store Preorder at Xbox Store Wishlist at Fanatical Prepare for more Zeds, as Killing Floor 3 is officially launching on March 25 for PC, PS5, and Xbox Series X. Fans of the cooperative FPS franchise can sign up for the chance to participate in the February 20-24 closed beta. If you're looking forward to Killing Floor 3, you can secure your preorder now. Three different versions are up for grabs, including a budget-friendly physical edition with a few in-game bonuses.Killing Floor 3 Preorder BonusesAll Killing Floor 3 preorders come with with the Flatline Tactical Bundle or the Clamefield Patrol Specialist Skins Pack. The Flatline Tactical Bundle includes the following in-game goodies:Continue Reading at GameSpot

The timeskip has afforded many characters in One Piece, primarily those in the Straw Hat Pirates, access to new abilities that they did not have beforehand. One example is Usopp, who is generally considered the weakest member of the Straw Hat Pirates. Despite his lack of physical strength, Usopp is a fairly intelligent and resourceful character. He uses a mixture of strategy, his sniping skills, and whatever he can find and master to accomplish his goals.

After nearly fifteen years of waiting since the last numbered installment in the modern Ninja Gaiden franchise, the surprise reveal of Ninja Gaiden 4 at Microsoft's January 2025 Xbox Developer Direct showcase has been a momentous moment for many fans of the franchise. Positioned alongside an Unreal Engine 5 remaster of the much-loved Ninja Gaiden 2,the latest installment in the Ninja Gaiden franchise provided much information for fans, yet some elements were hidden in the densely-packed reveal trailer for others to uncover.

Why The Indie Game Economy is Broken & Why Its Not Your FaultHere's How We Fix ItThe indie game industry is more alive than ever. Game engines like Unity and Unreal have made development more accessible, social media allows creators to reach players directly, and digital marketplaces have removed the barriers to publishing. Yet despite these advantages, most indie developers still struggle to turn their games into sustainable businesses. The unfortunate r

What is game audio and how is it made? I've just published a huge guide on exactly that at https://www.

Game File is a thrice-weekly newsletter about the culture and business of video games, written by longtime gaming reporter Stephen Totilo (Kotaku, Axios, MTV News, The New York Times). Subscribe here for scoops, interviews and regular updates about gaming with the authors nearly 8-year-old twins.In 2016, Activision made what seemed like a pretty sensible announcement. That years Call of Duty, a futuristic off-shoot called Infinite Warfare, would only be released for PC and current-gen consoles. That meant the so-called Gen 8 consoles, the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One.The PS3 and Xbox 360 were getting left behind.The Gen 8 consoles had been released back in 2013, and there had already been three annual Call of Duty games released since then that had versions made for both the PS3-era devices and the PS4 ones.By 2015, the Gen 7 version of Call of Duty didnt even include the next-gen-only campaign mode.For Activisions top franchise, the period of overlapping console generations had run for three years and was drawing to a close. About a year later, it would end for other big annual series, too.If that seems different from whats been happening this console generation for the last half-decade, well, it is.Call of Duty had three years of overlapping generational support last time. For this console transition, its had more. Last years Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 was the fifth consecutive annual Call of Duty game released on current gen consoles (Gen 9: PS5, Xbox Series) and the prior gen.Other annual series have also extended their prior-gen support longer this time than they did previously.EAs Madden NFL games were released for the PS3 and Xbox 360 as late as 2016, offering four straight versions that supported the old gen consoles and the new ones. Madden dropped old-gen support in 2017. This time around, Madden games have supported PS4 and Xbox One for five annual editions since the launch of the PS5 and Xbox Series with no word yet about whether theyll go to a sixth with their 2025 release.Take Twos WWE 2K series offered prior-gen gamers three years of overlapping support during the previous console transition before dropping old-gen support in 2017. This weeks announcement of WWE 2K 25 included plans for a prior-gen PS4/Xbox One version, extending the series cross-gen support this time around to four years.Sonys MLB The Show included PS3 versions for three releases after the launch of the PS4, before dropping support in 2017. Sony went longer this gen and has released four PS4-level editions of MLB The Show since the launch of the PS5. Notably, the final one came out last year. This week, Sony said that this Marchs MLB The Show 25 would finally ditch the prior generation and only be released for PS5 and Xbox Series (plus PC and Switch).Its been a slower, more extended console transition, as many of the industrys biggest companies have been loath to abandon the previous generation.It makes sense, to an extent. There were 10s of millions owners of Gen 8 consoles and not all of them have upgraded to newer units.Dont forget the last genLast spring, Sony president Hiroki Totoki said that there were 118 million monthly active users across PlayStation platforms and that about half of the people are playing on PS4.This was surprising, if only because of how little older-gen consoles are discussed by game companies and games media once new units launch. People playing PS4 in 2023 and 2024? Sure! It happened a lot. Just didnt get a lot of press.The PS5 had sold 59 million units by spring 2024, which was not a small number. But Sony still had an equally massive amount of players around 50 million happily gaming on the device that preceded it. (Prompted by those stats, last year I collected replies from around 300 people who told me why they had held off on getting a new-gen console. The most common answer: no must-have games to justify the price.)It certainly made sense that, in 2024, Sony would still sell a baseball video game to them that they could play.If anything, its notable that in 2025, Sony is finally showing a clear desire to cease PS4 support. Its first party games have been moving that way. Insomniacs Spider-Man franchise ditched PS4 for the Spider-Man 2 game in 2023. The ill-fated Concord last year was PS5-only.And Sony is now, right on schedule, moving its subscription plans benefits away from the prior generation.This week Sony also said it plans to stop regularly offering monthly PS4 games to PlayStation Plus subscribers, starting in January 2026. That means the PS4 benefit for PS Plus will have lasted just over 60 months since the launch of PS5. Thats almost exactly as long as the PS3 benefit for PS Plus lasted into the PS4 era.Sonys messaging about the PS Plus change this week noted that many of our players are currently playing on PS5 and have shifted toward redeeming and accessing PS5 titles.The curious case of NBA 2KIts unclear how successful the extension of support for the prior generation of consoles has been, either for players or game-makers.No big game publisher breaks down the sales for its cross-gen games by console generation, so its hard to know how popular, say, the PS4 version of MLB The Show 24 was compared to the PS5 edition.But there is one game series, NBA 2K, where the bet on longer old-gen support does not seem to have played out as planned. That situation illustrates what a weird console transition this has been.In August of last year, NBA 2K parent company Take Two reported lower-than-expected revenues from its cross-gen NBA 2K series, and executives wound up fielding a question from a financial analyst who suggested that Gen 8 consoles (PS4, Xbox One) were were proving overly sticky and that gamers were not buying newer, more expensive versions of the game.No, I dont think what consumers are saying is they are good with Gen 8 and dont care about Gen 9, Take Two chairman Strauss Zelnick said in response.We saw the exact contrary with regard to NBA 2K, where Gen 8 actually was not a high performer and performed worse than we expected.The cross-gen bet hadnt paid off, in other words.Three months later, Take Two president Karl Slatoff fielded an analyst question about seemingly flat sales for Septembers NBA 2K25 (released for Gen 8 and Gen 9) compared to the prior years editions.Again, the answer showed that Gen 8 had fallen off, problematically so.We still are dealing with the dynamic of: the Gen 9 console business is certainly growing, butnot at the same rate as the Gen 8 is declining, Slatoff said.He added: We obviously expect that thats going to reverse at one point in the future, as Gen 9 continues to take a foothold and people have more and more reasons to move from Gen 8 to Gen 9.(Note: One of the biggest motivators for Gen 8 gamers to finally buy a Gen 9 console is slated to be released by Slatoffs company later this year. And another note regarding any muted uptake for Gen 9: Consoles just havent dropped their prices this generation. By now, they normally would have.)So, was all this extended support for Xbox One and PS4 editions of games this far into the current console generation a mistake?In the U.S., at least, support for games on Gen 8 consoles last year does not appear to have been lucrative. It was not unusual for 2024 new releases with PS4 and/or XBO versions to see less than 10% of overall sales volume of that title coming from those versions, in some cases significantly less, Mat Piscatella, a Circana analyst who tracks the U.S. gaming market, told me.Who needs new hardware?For some gamers, the extended cross-gen support this time around has been a frustrating drag on the technical progress they expect from the medium. Whenever a new PS5 game also had to have a PS4 version, they reasoned, it couldnt have used the PS5s capabilities to the fullest.That may be, but the economics of modern gaming are also showing that games that push console hardware arent necessarily worth the cost of development.The question of whether gamers are moving on to the next hardware these days can easily morph into questions about whether game developers should or, more fundamentally, even whether a new console generation is needed.Every 7 or 8 years the platforms spend billions in R&D, Matthew Ball, an entrepreneur and occasional analyst who just wrote a provocative State of Video Gaming in 2025 report, told me. Then they spend billions in content development to re-platform otherwise happy customers while giving publishers an opportunity to elevate their game. And it is not leading to more players. Its not selling more units and its not selling more consoles and it is becoming brutally expensive.Ball doesnt advocate for an end to new consoles, but we had a blunt discussion about whether it is wise for game makers to still pursue the highest-end graphics people associate with a next-gen upgrade, when gamers are sending so many signals that they dont prioritize them.Games that dont require cutting edge hardware such as Fortnite, Roblox and Grand Theft Auto V still top console activity charts, Ball noted.Nintendo just outshined Sony and Microsoft for the past eight years with a console that launched with less horsepower than the PS4 and Xbox One.Over on Roblox, one of the planets most popular gaming platforms, games with advanced graphics are possible and some even do fairly well, but the most popular experiences are still visually primitive and dont exactly tax advanced gaming hardware. Speaking of supporting older hardware, Roblox is compatible back to 2013s iPhone 5S, though many experiences reportedly dont run very well on devices older than 2016s iPhone 7.The bottom line: Older devices can still run the games people most want to play.So, goodbye PS4. But, hey Sony, maybe take your time with PS6.More from Game File:200 minutes with Assassins Creed Shadows, including 11 extra-important onesNew Doom dropped multiplayer so developers could make a deeper solo game

Netflixs The Sandman will end with its upcoming second season, scheduled to hit the streaming service later this year, Variety reports. The cancellation follows sexual misconduct allegations made against creator Neil Gaiman.According to statement made by showrunner Allan Heinberg to Variety, the show had always been planned for just two seasons, despite the sprawling graphic novel series.The Sandman series has always been focused exclusively on Dreams story, and back in 2022, when we looked at the remaining Dream material from the comics, we knew we only had enough story for one more season, Heinberg told Variety. We are extremely grateful to Netflix for bringing the team all back together and giving us the time and resources to make a faithful adaptation in a way that we hope will surprise and delight the comics loyal readers as well as fans of our show.Multiple Gaiman projects have been put on hold since the sexual misconduct allegations first surfaced in summer 2024. Production of the third season of Good Omens halted following the allegations, with Gaiman stepping back from the show. Meanwhile, Disney indefinitely stopped work on its adaptation of Gaimans The Graveyard Book. Other adaptations, like Prime Videos Anansi Boys and the second season of The Sandman are still set to be released this year. The Sandman season 2 will follow the Seasons of Mists storyline from the comic series, with Esm Creed-Miles, Adrian Lester, and Barry Sloane joining the cast as Delirium, Destiny, and The Prodigal.

The entire discipline is premised on close contact and empathy with users. Yet, it is challenging to transform that knowledge into practical solutions and achieve prominence in companies. Why does this phenomenon occur?We can be part of the new role we have always wanted, but we must also improve some aspects of ourwork.It has been striking to observe how, over time, the relationship between companies and UX areas has not strengthened. Specific gaps remain that call into question the value and contribution that this discipline canprovide.This phenomenon can have its origin in many problems, such as the region of the world and its digital maturity, the intermittent hiring or redefinition of design profiles across companies, or the proliferation of professionals who appear to be more than they are and who also earn high salaries without experience in the field. All these factors contribute to the worn relationship between companies and UX areas; therefore, design results do not arrive in their best form, and dissatisfaction persists.All these problems may be evident in Latin America, where there is a boom of new companies born with a minimized conception of the relationship with users and superimpose monetary conversion before everything. Consequently, building a solid relationship with users is hard, and product results will never meet the users expectations.The other day, I talked with a remarkable design VP in Colombia, Carlos Pinilla, about several design challenges in companies today. After a long talk during which we expressed many current frustrations in the industry, I am left with some of the causes of this worn-out relationship between companies and UX teams, sadly some of those driven by us, the designers.Much has been said about this topic in articles that enunciate how external factors affect the current situation of the UX-companies relationship. Such is the case of Jared M. Spool, in his article Why is the UX job market such a mess right now? He walks us through all the market changes in the tech industry from the early 2000s and how we started to be highly desired by all companies to today when getting selected by a job application is almost impossible. In the same way, there are other more radical points of view, such as the one that Jon Upshaw shows in his article: Why I left UX behind (and you likely will,too).This lecture tries to cover another side of the conversation: how we, as designers, sometimes make things complicated within companies, adding more complexity to this problem for designers in the currentmarket.Analysis paralysisBeing unable to decide due to overthinking a problem. 4 tips for overcoming analysis paralysisAs UX designers, we have many perks we can use to build remarkable things. Sadly, misusing those abilities can block a process. UX analysis is the perfect example of creating disconnections from the business; YES, we have been told that to start building solutions, we must understand the market, develop scenarios, and translate what users want. This affirmation is 100% true, but sometimes, we, the designers, are so stubborn and unflexible with the design analysis that instead of solving challenges, we create adverse relationships with key stakeholders and teammates, leading us to unfavorable scenarios. We become dogmatic and cannot be flexible to advance in aprocess.Over-research / over-validationSometimes, the insights are there; you can deduce them by observing the problem, so concluding using your gut feeling is OK. The real challenge for us is to know when it is crucial to spend time on an investigation and when we can move forward without stopping the wheel. Over-research is expensive and can make us overthink what path to follow regarding a solution. Consequently, we can fall into the paradox of choice (a concept introduced by psychologist Barry Schwartz, which suggests that the more options we have, the less satisfied we feel with our decision.), leaving us with more uncertainty and doubts than practical and quick-to-apply solutions.Along with the over-research (thats on us) comes the over-validation, which comes from stakeholders and their excessive need to confirm a hypothesis or insight. Depending on the problems dimension, double-checking an idea can mean the difference between thriving in business and total failure. But what happens when this dynamic becomes an everyday routine? Inevitably, we will move slowly, looking for the perfect scenario, and sometimes there is no such thing, so building solutions with the available resources is also a positive and agile way to move forward and then learn about results and iterateagain.Lack of seniority andquality(When less is the standard measure for everything)Being agile is sometimes misunderstood; it is an excuse for allowing messy projects, processes, and even poor decisions. In scenarios where the quality of the final product may be compromised, it is essential to have the appropriate seniority to guide the projects direction. Not everything needs a minimum expression of quality, especially in environments where stabilizing products after a launch will always fall at the bottom of an outdatedbacklog.Every product team must fight for high standards and sound practices. A lack of people who raise the bar within the company will force us to always accept low-quality standards.We are agile is a phrase that can penetrate a companys culture and create a low notion of quality if it is not well-guided. In the never-ending fight to be first in the market and develop high-quality products, seniority is worth and having proper companionship from leaders can make a difference in the long term. Sometimes, a proper check from a superior can save the companymoney.Carlos explains that a junior designers hasty conclusions may not reveal the truth behind an event: In the company I work for, we needed to understand whether users liked to sign contracts digitally or personally, so I ran research to understand the users hesitation behind this phenomenon. Stakeholders had a particular hypothesis: the website was unclear in pulling more clients through an online experience, and a junior designer could fix the issue rapidly, but results revealed trust issues from clients instead of the website malfunctioning.In such situations, a senior designers conclusions are different and more profound than those a junior designer can independently draw.An extra complexity to simplethingsAs designers, we deeply love concepts, trends, or fancy frameworks from other companies, but thinking beyond that can be challenging for some. It seems like from college, we should suppose solutions systematically with a name on them. Real-life challenges do not consist only of static concepts; we should understand our context and users to develop unique solutions. Im not saying we should be blind to a global concept conversation, but taking this as the unique source of truth is a mistake, Carlossays.When searching for a solution, we add an unnecessary layer of complexity because this is how it is written in the manual, or this is how X company does it. We cut ourselves off and dont let creativity flow to find new, unique points of view that can lead us down more interesting paths.So far, all points make sense and reflect a vast company and talent problem nowadays, at least in Latin America. I share the same concerns that Carlos does, and from my standpoint, Id like to address some issues that increase this extra complexity in the UXscene:If you wonder why you are not more protagonist in your squad, it can be because your level of conversation is lower than expected.Lousy commutation skillsUnable to explain or sell an idea reinforces the stereotype of only making things pretty on interfaces; this perception may be strong among some stakeholders. As creators (designers) of every solution, we should OWN or at least be the protagonists in the narrative around whatever we build. Some common mistakes around this issueare:Not showing interest in understanding the business as an overallpicture.Not speaking the people language means we can be too technical when prompting users without a digital background.Not elevating conversations beyond a visual standpoint.We are not referring to metrics every time we show a solution.Due to this circumstance, some companies only hire designers with the premise of decorating things, which prevents us from achieving a broader strategic level and the relevance wewant.Not understanding the economy ofdesign.Sometimes, we can affect a process by designing more of what is needed. Over-design can be problematic because it blocks the entire product dynamic until we finish a solution. When we finally needed to deliver, much of the deliverables would not be executed because the initial scope was different, so we spent time unnecessarily.The economy of design includes, beyond designing short experiences, the economy of thinking and solving; this means being creative in finding solutions with the available resources without constantly thinking about all possible scenarios if we know that a couple of actions delimit the primary product value forusers.Tasks over the bigpicture.If you wonder why you are not more protagonist in your squad, it can be because your level of conversation is lower than expected. Conversation level refers to the range of decisions or ideas you can provide to your group, becoming a key player in the production dynamic. Ive seen how designers only focus on delivering things without a complete understanding of the problem or impact in numbers, which shortens their level of conversation to a specific part of the problem. Is this all bad? Im sure it is not, but to be a key player, you must transcend the design conversation into new territories and challenges.Are we victims or perpetrators of thiscrisis?I believe that we can do better. However, the market is affected by investment movements and hiring, which impacts the dynamics of demand and supply in companies. In my years of experience, I have also seen how this discipline has disfigured a little of its primary essence, which is contact with the user. Because of this phenomenon, it isnt easy to establish our knowledge and show a fundamental value in the growth of technology.We can be part of the new role we have always wanted, but we must also improve some aspects of our work. Sometimes, it is more important to be at the forefront of concepts, methodologies, and new fashion words to turn our profession into something systematic, sterile, and distanced from users. I think that is where the biggest challenge of UX design is and the importance it must build fromwithin.UX is easy, but we made it complicated was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Deciding when and how to disclose our use of AI-basedtoolsPhoto by Volodymyr Hryshchenko onUnsplashAs AI continues to automate more tasks, it reshapes how we work and create. With tools like ChatGPT and Claude, content creation has become faster and easier, but this shift raises two important questions:At what point does AI enhancement turn into dependence?Should we disclose our use of AIand if so, does it signal intelligence or laziness? Going further: What does it signal about the veracity of the content and even the ethics of theauthor?AI is increasingly playing a greater role in everything from writing content and generating images to composing poetry and helping us design and develop new products and services. As it supplements human creativity, we must also ask ourselves: What role do inspiration and originality still play in an AI-assisted world?Great responsibility comes with this great power that AI brings. As practitioners, we must embrace transparency about the role AI-based tools play in our work: not as a judgement, but as a commitment to intentional and ethical use. This additionally allows readers to make informed choices about how to interpret the content aswell.Philosophy of disclosure: why transparency mattersWhy does transparency matter? Should we disclose our use of AI in the first place? If so, when and how should it be disclosed?Transparency matters because it ensures Trust between the author and the reader. It's often an unspoken ethical contract: I sign my name on this article and you, the reader, believe me when I said that I wrote it (I did). But AI disrupts this assumption.Definitions of authorshipThroughout history, technological advancements (from the printing press to photography to automation) have challenged what counts as originality and authorship.The printing press disrupted the oral tradition and what counts as storytelling, but writers still took credit forbooks.Digital photography replaced film, but professional photographers still claim authorship.AI-generated content raises a new question: If AI co-creates, how should credit be assigned?When a human writes entirely on their own, authorship is clear. Best practices dictate that ideas and quotes should be cited and referenced as per the style guide you use. But what happens when you add AI to themix?If AI assists with background research, is it like using a search engine? Should ChatGPT be cited as asource?If AI suggests ideas that I develop further, is the final product still"Mine"?If I copy/paste AI-generated text into my article, am I still the primary author? Or does the AI-based tool at some point take over for doing most of the work? At what percentage does the work become "Notmine"?What about ownership? Who owns the workwho retains the copyright? Does the AI tool own the work or does the human that prompted it retain the ownership?Transparency isn't just an ethical practice, it's a question of intellectual honesty. In academia, plagiarism can have serious negative consequences. If we use AI to assist in our work and we copy/paste it into something and pass it off as if it is our own work, are we committing plagiarism? (See Is Using Artificial Intelligence Plagiarism? for more discussion onthis).What about ghostwriting? If someone else writes a book but you put your name on it, did you really write it? And are you ethically able to put your name on it? Isn't that misleading?Extending this same scenario to AI: if your use of AI significantly shaped the outcome of your work and you don't disclose your use of AI, isn't that equally as misleading? At what point does this become deception?Misrepresentation and deceptionRight now, some AI-generated content is still obviousI see examples of obviously AI-generated content in my spam inbox daily. But as AI develops, what happens when we can no longer tell the difference? Have you ever been fooled by AI? Is it ok to be deceived?At what point does AI augmentation become deception?Without transparency, AI-created works could mislead audiences, erode credibility, and diminish the perceived value of human effort. Just as we cite sources in academic research or disclose conflicts of interest, disclosing AIs role allows audiences to engage with content in a fully informed and ethicalway.Consider the rise of AI influencersessentially fake personalities that comment on posts, promote brands, and share opinions. If AI-generated influencers start endorsing products, dont you want to know whats happening behind the scenes? I know Ido.Transparency is not just about ethicsits about intellectual integrity. The consequences of failing to disclose AI use are still unfolding; as far as Ive seen, almost no-one is disclosing their use of AI, though I later found this piece about an AI transparency statement by Kester Brewin. Misrepresentationwhether intentional or notcould devalue both AI-generated and human-created content in addition to eroding trust. If anything, its certainly adding a lot of spam to myinbox!By integrating disclosure into our workflows, we shape the norms around AI use now rather than reacting to them later. The AI Transparency Framework offers a practical approach to make thishappen.The AI Transparency Framework IllustratedApplying the framework to contentcreationI believe human/AI collaboration is a 1+1=3. We create better products faster by taking advantage of AI-based tools responsibly and ethically. The next step is to be more transparent about ouruse.In order to demonstrate the application of the framework, lets use the example of using AI for content creation. The level of AI involvement assigned will depend on the kind of content, the context, the goal, and most importantly, how AI was used (or not) throughout theprocess.Before going deeper into the scale itself, there are a few other clarifications about the framework to take note offirst.Speed and efficiencyAI increases speed and efficiency as you move up the scale from Level 1 (no AI) to Level 5 (fully AI-driven). For example, in academia, Level 1 (fully human-driven) may currently be the only acceptable level of AI use, but this expectation will likely evolve, much like the once-rigid rules around using the internet for research.Doing things "the old way," the way we did it before the introduction of AI, will take longer. But it will have an authenticity and a humanness to it that at least for right now, AI has a difficult time achieving. At the same time, while AI is progressing rapidly, it will be less and less obvious to tell if something is AI-generated. This is where transparency about the use of AI can help us to better identify and acknowledge itsuse.Appropriate useFully automated tools categorized at Level 5 are still validbut I argue that the use of AI should be openly disclosed. Its about being transparent about how AI-based tools are being used, not judging whether its an appropriate use.Of course, there will be much discussion about "Appropriate use," my hope is that this transparency framework will give us a set of tools to have that discussion in a more open and constructive way.Visual representationThe scale is visually represented with a rainbow gradient, reflecting nuance in AI use. However, I do not encourage interpreting these colors as value judgments.For instance, red typically signals danger, so I have chosen orange instead of red for Level 5 to help avoid this interpretation. Level 5 is not "Bad," it's just that orange better emphasizes the caution needed when fully outsourcing intellectual work to AI. And we should exercise cautionhere.In contrast, green for Level 3, representing collaboration, highlights how human-AI partnerships can enhance creativity and output when done responsibly and ethically. This doesn't mean green is "Good" or "the Best," or even "Optimal," it just refers to a balanced use of AI to support the process. An equilibrium.Disclosing levels of AI involvementUsing content creation as the application of the framework, following is a discussion of each level along with benefits andrisks.Level 1: Fully human-driven; No use ofAIAI is not used in any capacity for the creation of this work. The benefits of Level 1 include complete originality and unassisted creativity. However, it may sacrifice efficiency and miss opportunities to gain deeper insights or broader perspectives that AI tools can provide. This could result in slower workflows or less effective solutions (How generative AI can boost highly skilled workers' productivity).My hunch is that in the future, this is the realm of pure artists, writers, poets, and academics (I know, even that word sounded like a judgement). Maybe we need some new terms here. Just as the internet sped up the access to information, I imagine that use of AI will take much of what currently happens here in Level 1 and it will move to AI-assisted Level 2 or Balanced use Level3.Level 2: Human-centric creation; AI supported researchHere, AI is used only for minor background research or reference checks, with humans retaining control of content, ideas, and critical thinking. This level allows AI to support human creativity passively, but over-reliance on AI research can lead to oversimplification, missed nuances, or a failure to leverage AIs organizational strengths.Level 3: Balanced collaboration between humans andAILevel 3 represents a partnership between humans and AI that enhances efficiency while preserving originality.AI supports research, organizes ideas, and clarifies content while humans drive critical thinking, creativity, and intent. Humans remain responsible for ethical oversight and ensuring transparency. Additional benefitsinclude:Creativity: AI supports innovation and creativity by organizing complex ideas and offering clarity, but humans retain control over originality andvision.Avoiding bias: Balances the power of AI with human judgment to avoid bias, misrepresentation, and ethical pitfalls.Level 4: AI-driven content; Human oversightAI takes on a significant role in research, development, and some critical thinking, with humans providing oversight through review and refinement.This greatly increases efficiency and scalability, reducing the time required to perform certain tasks. However, an over-reliance on AI risks diminishing human creativity and contextual understanding. Limited oversight can also allow unverified biases or inaccuracies to slip through if not caught in a humanreview.Currently, I see a lot of marketing automation that falls into this bucket and (in less-effective implementations), Level5.Level 5: Fully AI-driven; Minimal human oversightAI did almost 100% of the work, from research to ideation, with minimal human input. While this maximizes speed and volume, allowing for rapid content generation or decision-making.However, it raises concerns about originality, accountability, and trust. Outputs may perpetuate bias, inaccuracies, or ethical lapses, and presenting AI work as human-generated risks eroding integrity.When you see something that's obviously AI-generated, irrelevant, and tone deaf, perhaps you're like me and you completely ignore it. Generating sales emails might allow you to spam millions of people, but the backlash is coming and authenticity will become more and more valued in thefuture.Unintended implicationsIt's important to acknowledge that being more transparent about our use of AI may have some unintended consequences.Risk of normalizing over-reliance onAIAs AI-based tools evolve, it's easy to start defaulting to their use. While they may help in many ways, it doesn't replace the cognitive work of a humanbrain.Just recently, my friend Sam Ladner shared a study showing a strong negative correlation between cognitive offloading and critical thinking.Cognitive offloading, image from Sam Ladner; FullstudyThat's right, over-reliance on AI can reduce our critical thinking!We must not depend on AI-based tools, we must integrate them thoughtfully. AI should enhance our capabilities, not replace the cognitive effort required to come up with new ideas, develop intellection, and hone ourcraft.While I discuss Level 3 as a collaboration and a balanced use of AI, I should also caution the habitual or "default" to using AI to replace our human cognitive thinking (or "Cognitive offloading, as the study calls it), even at a balanced use of Level3.If human-AI collaboration is seen as an ideal, we may end up disincentivizing people from pushing their own cognitive and creative boundaries. And then we all miss out on the beauty and brilliance that comes from deepwork.Risk of perception shiftsTransparency is not judgement in and of itself. However, providing additional transparency about the use of AI in the context of a work does not mean that audiences may still decide to judge the content differently due to the disclosure of the use ofAI.When we engage with content (or a product), we make assumptions about its origin and how we should interpret it. When we disclose that that content was produced with AI in some form, it begins to challenge traditional ideas of creativity and what a creative output is or should belike.If you know an article was created with the assistance of AI, how would you perceive it? What if that article was fully-AI generated? What if it was fully-human generated? How does your response change in each of these scenarios?Some potential responses include:Resetting expectationsof what the content is and should be doing or just how we should approach interpreting it in the firstplace.Engage differentlyHow might we read or engage with it differently because we know that AI was involved? Are we more or less critical of the article that was human-driven or the one that was AI-driven?Devaluing the article more based on more use of AIfor example, Level 1 articles are inherently better or more valuable than Level 5 articles.Eroding trustif the article used the assistance of AI, can it still be trusted or should we be more critical because AI tends to oversimplify and introduce bias?There's an interesting parallel with food labeling: if you know that a product was genetically modified, does that change your perception of the product? Do you make a different purchasing decision? Is it better to know that the product is genetically modified (GMO)? Should we label genetically modified food? How should it belabeled?By using food labeling as a parallel, perhaps you're thinking, "Of course we should label genetically modifiedfood!"Are you also thinking, "Of course we should label AI-assisted involvement in our products and services!" aswell?Your response to these two questions is worth reflecting on.Additional applications of the frameworkThis framework applies beyond content creation. It can be applied across other disciplines and industries to guide transparent AI usein.In the examples below, I'll define Levels 1, 3, and 5 separately, however, in eachcase:Level 2 can be defined as "Mostly human with someAI."Level 3 is a balanced integration of the two ends of thescaleLevel 4 as "Mostly AI with some human oversight."Product developmentLevel 1: Manual prototyping without AI involvement.Level 3: AI assists in analyzing user feedback or generating design variants, with humans making final decisions.Level 5: The entire design process is AI-automated, with minimal humaninput.Reflection: Are we using AI to complement human creativity, or automating decisions that require empathy andcontext?UX ResearchLevel 1: Data collection and analysis are entirely manual and human-driven. AI was not used to assist in the process atall.Level 3: AI identifies trends, but researchers interpret findings to ensure meaningful insights.Level 5: AI conducts research and analysis without human involvement, risking oversimplification of user experiences.Reflection: Is AI helping uncover meaningful insights, or oversimplifying complex user experiences?Decision-makingLevel 1: Decisions rely solely on human expertise.Level 3: AI provides insights or simulations, but humans retain decision-making authority.Level 5: Decisions are fully automated by AI, potentially compromising empathy and ethical judgment.Reflection: Are we using AI insights to enhance decisions, or surrendering judgment to the algorithm?Hiring & HR decisionsShould AI-assisted hiring disclose when a rsum was screened by an algorithm? Are AI-assisted screening processes biased?By contrast, should candidates disclose if AI helped them write their application? Is a grammar check the same as using aLLM?Legal & Healthcare fieldsShould doctors and lawyers disclose AI-assisted decisions?If an AI-assisted medical diagnosis is given, should patients know exactly what role AIplayed?From hiring decisions to legal opinions, AI-driven processes are changing industries. Applying this framework in fields like HR, healthcare, and law can ensure informed decision-making and ethical accountability.It is my hope that we can build out our thinking about transparent use of AI together over time and that the Transparency Framework for the levels of AI involvement can become part of a new discourse on our intentional use ofAI.Encouraging reflectionFinally, the framework can also be used to reflect on one or many of the following areas:General reflection: Does this level of AI use enhance or compromise the quality and integrity of thework?Intentionality: Am I being intentional about my use of AI or am I defaulting to a certain level ofuse?Creativity: Is AI amplifying creativity or stifling originality?Learning and growth: How does the use of AI impact my skill development and craftsmanship?Inclusivity and bias: Is AI helping to amplify diverse perspectives, or reinforcing harmful generalizations?Accountability: Can I clearly articulate which parts of the work were AI-generated versus human-driven?Human flourishing: Does the use of AI affect my personal sense of purpose, fulfillment, andmeaning?The goal of transparencyAI-based tools are already shaping our present reality. The question is not whether we use AI, but how we disclose, govern, and apply it responsibly.Transparency is not about restrictionit is about trust. By adopting AI transparency as a standard, we shape the ethical and philosophical foundation of how AI integrates into our work, our industries, and our daily lives. This is our opportunity to lead, before regulation forces its ownoutcome.This approach doesnt aim to dictate a correct level of AI involvement but instead encourages openness about the choices made in the creative and decision-making process.If your reflection raises concerns, reconsider whether AI is being used responsibly and intentionally and respond accordingly.As we evolve with AI, our goal should always be to ensure it works for us, enhances human flourishing, and promotes purpose, creativity, and equity forall.Full circle with full disclosureI believe this article represents AI Transparency Level 3. The framework is wholly mine, but I used ChatGPT to refine some wording and perform some background research to think through the implications and ensure I haven't missed anything important. I also had feedback and help from my colleague KatieTrocin.Learn moreThis article doesn't exist in isolation but is the natural outcome of two other recently published articles:Human flourishing in the age of AIif you are looking for reference articles and sources cited, this is the place to start. With an extensive appendix and sources cited throughout, this article is a treasure trove of references and a synthesis of current thinking on human flourishing andAI.The human-centered AI manifestothe manifesto is based on the initial human flourishing article as a summary of principles of human-centered AI and commitments to action. If you are so moved, there's a link to a change.org petition you can sign to show your support and stand up for the responsible design and development of human-centered AI-based products and services.Again a huge thank you to my colleague Katie Trocin for the lit review, feedback, and discussion that improved thisarticle.Josh LaMar is the Co-Founder and CEO of Amplinate, an international agency focusing on cross-cultural Research & Design. As the Chief Strategy Officer of JoshLaMar Consult, he helps Entrepreneurs grow their business through ethical competitive advantage.AI transparency framework was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.