UI/UX Design Principles

Your Level Layout Is Talking — Even When You Don't Want It to
 Here’s something every level designer needs to hear: Players don’t read your intentions — they read your spaces.
 You can write all the documentation in the world, but once a player picks up the controller, the layout is the message.
 This is called spatial communication.
 It’s not about the lore.
 It’s not about dialogue or item descriptions.
 It’s about what the space itself is telling the player.
 When I design a level, I constantly ask:
 🔹 What does the shape of this room say?

 🔹 What does the path imply about danger, safety, or momentum?
 🔹 What behavior am I inviting just by how I placed a ledge or door?
 Because players read the space instinctively.
 They’ve been trained by decades of games to understand that:
 → A high vantage point is a place to scout or reflect.
 → A fork in the road is a chance to explore — or a trap.
 → A sudden drop-off is either freedom or a point of no return.
 Even when we don’t mean to say these things, the space says them anyway.
 Here's an example: I once designed a space where players kept missing the critical path. The layout made perfect sense on paper. The lighting was functional.
 But it felt wrong. Why? Because the room was too symmetrical. The brain saw two equal options and said: “Neither of these is more important.”
 No leading lines. No height cue. No soft framing. Just a big box. The moment I broke that symmetry — shifting the ceiling height, pulling one path into shadow and spotlighting the other — players immediately funneled in the right direction. No popups. No tutorials. Just spatial intent.
 So here’s the lesson: If your space isn’t guiding the player, it’s confusing them. Your layout is your first line of communication.
 Before UI, before art, before VO — the player interacts with space. Make it intentional.
 ✅ Use composition to guide the eye. ✅ Use contrast to imply direction. ✅ Use rhythm and pacing to control tempo. ✅ Use space to reflect narrative or emotional tone. ✅ Use shape to suggest interactivity or danger. Don’t let your layout sit there passively.
Make it speak.
 🎮 Great level design doesn’t just support gameplay — it suggests it.

 It communicates with confidence, even in silence. So next time you build a space, ask yourself:

What is this layout telling the player, even if I say nothing at all?
 Have you ever changed a layout purely because it “felt” wrong, even when it looked good?
 #LevelDesign #GameDesign #SpatialCommunication #UXDesign #EnvironmentArt #Gamedev

With Quest3s bringing mixed reality even more into the mainstream, I decided to share a short weekly series and video examples about what we learned working on our mixed game Track Craft. Hopefully, this can help anyone who wants to jump into MR or just spark some inspiration ;) 💡𝗧𝗔𝗞𝗘𝗔𝗪𝗔𝗬 𝟭 - 𝗜𝗠𝗠𝗘𝗥𝗦𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝘃𝘀. 𝗔𝗖𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗜𝗕𝗜𝗟𝗜𝗧𝗬💡 Everyone wants to make use of all the incredible features MR headsets provide. But the more features you use, the less accessible your game will be. At least for now, until the technology evolves. Here is how I structure MR apps into 3 "levels" based on how they use the current XR headset capabilities and explain what it means regarding UX implications (complications) for the player. 𝗟𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗟 𝟭 - "𝗛𝗢𝗟𝗢𝗚𝗥𝗔𝗠𝗦" - Games that use the fundamental functionality of MR headsets - render a believable hologram. It is the least immersive but most accessible - as the user doesn't need technologies like the room scan to enjoy the experience. Play and keep in touch with your surroundings, or do something else during the game. Enjoy the magic of tricking your brain into thinking objects are in your space and forcing you to walk around them. We use this as the primary way to play Track Craft and disable the boundary. 𝗟𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗟 𝟮 - "𝗘𝗡𝗩𝗜𝗥𝗢𝗡𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗕𝗔𝗦𝗘𝗗" - Using a room scan to include the environment for improving visuals (i.e., shadows, occlusion...) or interactions (i.e., collisions). It is more immersive but needs setup, and any technical glitch (i.e., scan breaks or is not accurate enough) can break your game mechanic. This allows you to drive your car around your room in Track Craft or turn your home into a spaceship in Starship Home by Creature or a zombie-invaded house in The Cabin by Soul Assembly. Those games are great design examples of apps that ensure players "get their reward" for the time taken to set up in the form of a fantastic MR experience. 𝗟𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗟 𝟯 - "𝗠𝗨𝗟𝗧𝗜-𝗨𝗦𝗘𝗥" - There are holograms aware of my ditialized physical space, and multiple people interact with them. This blew my mind when I experienced it for the first time. It is the most advanced MR experience you can get but with the lowest player accessibility. Players need multiple headsets in one place, at least one room scan that doesn't break, networking, and a bit of luck that everything will work at once :) If something breaks, your game mechanic can be gone. We use this approach in the co-located track editor feature in Track Craft. I guess that future sports titles will lead this category as we are used to meeting our friends to play sports together - and this is the same thing just using technology, and the possibilities will be endless. Imagine a two vs two match, with each team on the other side of the planet. Neither needs a full court or all physical equipment to play. #mixedreality #metaquest #quest3s #trackcraft #brainzgamify

Alternative Colors for Pure Black in Design⚫ Based on my personal research and consultations with fellow designers, I have developed a color palette of alternative shades that can be used in design instead of pure black (#000000). These colors provide a less saturated appearance to text content, using charcoal grays and other dark tones to maintain essential readability while reducing contrast against a light background and reducing eye strain when interacting with content for long periods of time. For your convenience, I have listed all the colors from the palette with their codes below. Just copy and apply the code you want instead of pure black: 1. Charcoal Gray | Hex #121212 2. Dark Slate Gray | Hex: #191919 3. Outer Space | Hex: #252525 4. Rich Black | Hex: #0A0A0A 5. Coffee Bean | Hex: #1B1B1B 6. Dark Gray | Hex: #212427 7. Oil Black | Hex: #0C0C0C 8. Obsidian | Hex: #0B1215 9. Ebony | Hex: #222428 10. Black Chocolate | Hex: #100D08 11. Gunmetal | Hex: #1D1F21 12. Smoky Black | Hex: #101720 13. Oxford Blue | Hex: #212A37 14. Eerie Black | Hex: #232023 15. Jet Black | Hex: #161618 16. Iridium | Hex: #181818 17. Arsenic | Hex: #11181C 18. Charleston Green | Hex: #212124 19. Dark Gunmetal | Hex: #222428 20. Jet | Hex: #2A2A2A 21. Black Olive | Hex: #242526 22. Midnight Blue | Hex: #212121 #color #colorpalette #blackcolor #alternatives #design

Don’t fall into this trap: Trying to scale a product with unscalable decisions. Many teams assume the solution is to hire more people, add more tools, or push harder. They think velocity will magically appear if everyone just works a bit more efficiently. But the problem isn’t effort. It’s decision debt. When every new screen requires fresh alignment When designers have to guess which version is “the latest” When small choices turn into big conversations The team slows down, not because they’re slow, but because there’s no clarity. What you need isn’t more process. You need fewer decisions. Here’s the shift high-functioning teams make: 1.) They stop solving the same problems twice. 2.) Instead of debating buttons, they decide once. 3.) Instead of customising every component, they standardise where it counts. 4.) Instead of relying on memory, they build shared language. That’s what a good design system does. It’s not a UI kit. It’s infrastructure for speed. Because the faster your team can move past the basics. The more energy they’ll have for the work that actually moves the product forward. Without it, everything feels like Day 1. With it, ideas ship faster, reviews shrink, and juniors grow without hand-holding. Most leaders want momentum. Few are willing to reduce decisions to get there. What’s one small decision your team keeps remaking that should already be solved? If this resonated, share it with someone leading a complex team. Follow Joe Woodham for weekly insights on design leadership, systems thinking, and what actually scales.

I've been a designer for over 15 years. Here's what I'm doing to stay relevant in today's world. The design game? It has changed. AI is here. Timelines are shorter. And the market’s more crowded than ever. If you’re still designing like it’s 2015, you can feel it under your skin, you’re already behind. Start doing these to stay sharp, relevant, and in demand: 1. Use AI as a creative partner        Rapidly generate UI variants, content,    or even test flows with AI tools.        Don't expect it to do the job for you.    Collaborate with it.         2. Design for speed of delivery        Prioritize MVP thinking:    𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩    𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵?         3. Collaborate in real-time across disciplines        Lean into multiplayer design sessions with PMs,    devs, and marketing for speed and shared ownership.         4. Practice outcome-driven design        Define success metrics early, align with KPIs,    and measure post-launch impact.        It's also good for your portfolio!         5. Invest in personal branding and visibility        With a tough job market, a visible portfolio,    case studies, and thought leadership matter    more than ever.         6. Learn basic prompt engineering        Knowing how to talk to AI tools effectively    becomes a superpower in ideation and automation.         7. Participate in cross-functional strategy        Understand product strategy, roadmap tradeoffs,    and business goals to design with context.        With no context, you are no better than AI.         8. Upskill in motion, 3D, and multi-modal design        New interfaces are emerging. Voice, spatial, AR...    and designers who dabble in these areas    will stand out.         9. Embrace “design ops” thinking        Improve internal design workflows, documentation,    onboarding, and how design scales in organizations. Adapt or get left behind. ✌️ If this hit home, share it with your team or the designer who still thinks 𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘱𝘴𝘶𝘮 is fine. Got thoughts? Let’s debate in the comments.

📏 METRICS IN LEVEL DESIGN (The invisible numbers that make spaces feel right) Metrics aren’t sexy. They don’t get the likes that verticality or foreshadowing do. But if you want to build better levels, you need them. Abstract? Yes. Difficult? Absolutely. Useful? More than anything else. Here’s how metrics quietly decide if your level works or fails: 1️⃣ Player Scale How tall is the player? How far can they jump? 🎮 Half-Life 2 - The step height, ladder reach, and jump arc are tuned so you trust what you can and can’t do. 🔑 Takeaway: Metrics teach affordances. Consistency = player confidence. 2️⃣ Combat Spaces How wide is an arena? How much cover? What’s the spacing between enemies? 🎮 DOOM Eternal - Enemy speed, arena size, and dash distance all interlock. Too small and it’s chaos, too big and it’s empty. 🔑 Takeaway: Combat balance is geometric before it’s tactical. 3️⃣ Traversal & Navigation How long before the player sees a landmark? How far is a safe sprint between covers? 🎮 Uncharted 4 - Climb distances, rope swings, and ledge spacing are carefully tuned so traversal feels cinematic but controlled. 🔑 Takeaway: Metrics create rhythm - slow/fast, near/far, tight/open. 4️⃣ Encounter Timing How often should intensity spike? How many seconds until the next safe zone? 🎮 Resident Evil 4 - Enemy spawn pacing and corridor lengths are tuned to seconds, not just meters. 🔑 Takeaway: Good metrics manage tension as much as space. 5️⃣ World Consistency Metrics also keep your world believable. Door sizes, corridor widths, vehicle clearances. 🎮 Halo CE - Every space is scaled for both the player and the Warthog, making the vehicle feel like a natural extension of level design. 🔑 Takeaway: Break your metrics and immersion collapses. 🔥 Design Lesson: Metrics are the invisible backbone. Get them wrong, and no amount of art will save the level. Get them right, and players won’t notice - they’ll just trust the world. 💬 What’s a game that just felt right to move through, not because of the graphics, but because the distances, jumps, and spaces all clicked? Drop your examples below 👇 🎓 Want to design levels that players trust instinctively? Our Level Design Mastery class covers metrics, pacing, and the invisible math that makes worlds feel real. 🔗 Link in comments. #LevelDesign #GameDesign #Metrics #PlayerExperience #CombatDesign #TraversalDesign #GameDev #DesignThinking #LevelAnalysis #Worldbuilding

🚀 "Let's just hire 2 more designers to finish the design 3x faster"⏰ That's so wrong, and here's why. You can cook a chicken in 1 hour at high heat. Or in 3 hours at low heat. 𝐀𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧'𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐩 𝐢𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠, 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭? Design is similar. When you add more designers: → Everyone needs time to understand the project → We spend half the day just syncing up with each other → Styles and ideas start clashing → Someone still has to put all the pieces together at the end I've been on teams where 3 designers took longer than 1 would have. Because we were too busy talking about the work instead of actually doing it. Of course, sometimes parallel work makes sense. But usually? 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐠𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐚 𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐝 𝐭𝐫𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐨𝐠𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫. The real speed boost comes from: 🔸 A clear brief from the start 🔸 Quick feedback (not waiting weeks for approval) 🔸 Letting the designer actually make decisions 𝐌𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐬𝐧'𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫. 𝐀 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐢𝐬. #UXDesign #UIDesign #DesignProcess #uiux

You should know when to move on from a design decision. The ideal answer is to test your decisions with a customer working group. But when that's not your reality, here is how I've moved quickly: 1. The Three-Question Check: - Does it solve the user's job to be done? Yes/No. - Does it align with our design principles? Yes/No. - Can it be built and iterated upon within our timeframe? Yes/No. If all answers are 'Yes', you've hit critical mass. 2. Gut Check with Data: Your intuition is valuable. But find quick ways to pair it with any known data and feedback (as limited as it might be): - Dig up surveys (e.g. post-purchase, churn, etc) - Ask sales & support (they get a lot of feedback) - Read product reviews Convergence with the average? You're there. 3. The Risk-Reward Ratio: Assess the risks of further tweaking. Minor aesthetic gains vs. potential delays? Time to move on. 4. Cross-Departmental Green Light: Quick alignment check-in with devs and PMs. If they're on board, it's a green signal. 5. The 80/20 Rule: Perfection is a myth. Aim for 80% solution that addresses the key needs effectively. You don't have to dig deep into every edge-case right now. Identify the ones with the most risk, and shelve the rest. John Wooden said it best: speed is your ally, but haste is your foe. Moving quickly is an advantage when you're methodical about how you do it.

At Liquifi, we've reached over $100M in total value processed, and we're still growing fast. Here's 4 principles we've used to scale 👇 1 → Identify who you're actually building for And remember — your initial assumptions might be wrong. When we launched, we initially thought Liquifi was mainly for #web3 founders. But when we talked to users, we realized that our main audience is actually CFOs + Heads of Finance. Founders benefit from the product, but its the finance leaders at web3 companies who suffer most directly from the pain of not being able to manage token vesting, compliance complications, etc. That shift in thinking dramatically impacted: > our product roadmap > our user discovery motion > our outbound sales strategy > which features we prioritized — and why > our entire approach to growth 2 → Identify your ICP's hardest-hitting pain points. We knew we were building for CFOs + Heads of Finance—but we needed to intimately understand their day-to-day pain points. Not just what we thought bothered or annoyed them. Oliver Tang and I had worked at crypto co's before Liquifi, so we understand the end problems—but mainly from a beneficiary perspective. Not necessarily from the CFO seat. To tap into the CFO brain, we interviewed tons of them — dug into their psychology, understood their workflows, and figured out where breakdowns + inefficiencies happen. 3 → Ignore irrelevant features If you can't draw a straight line from [feature X] to [solving pain point Y] — don't build it. Stay laser focused on building what solves your ICP's problems. Ignore other distractions. The ideal motion: > Build the simplest solution to your customer's pain point > Make it insanely easy for them to start using and testing it > Gather feedback, then constantly iterate 4 → Relentlessly test your hypotheses. We're always talking to users. Our entire company—every function—stays as close to our end user as possible. It's the only way to really understand what problems we're solving for — and whether our solutions work :)