Review workflow

Review, approve, and ship AI-generated game assets with context

Review in Assets Studio is part of the asset record. Teams can compare candidates, comment on results, request changes, approve official outputs, and keep a status history before an asset enters production.

Review decisions stay tied to the asset, not lost in chat threads.

Approved candidates can become official production assets.

Reviewers can validate work without creating new production content.

A review loop built around generated variants

AI generation often produces several plausible candidates. Assets Studio gives teams a structured place to compare those options against the brief, visual identity, references, and production constraints.

Weak outputs can be archived, useful alternatives can stay available, and the best candidate can move into approval without losing the generation context.

Clear decisions for production teams

Comments, review requests, approvals, requested changes, rejections, and production readiness checks give each asset a clearer state.

That matters when producers, artists, reviewers, and developers need to understand whether an asset is exploratory, waiting for review, approved, or ready to use.

Human approval stays central

Assets Studio is designed for assisted production. Creative direction, feedback, selection, approval, and final production decisions stay with the people responsible for the game.

Workflow

How the production flow works

01Generate or upload candidate assets from a brief.
02Compare variants against the creative requirements.
03Comment, request changes, reject, or approve candidates.
04Promote the approved output and mark it production-ready.

Production briefsReview candidates against the structured brief that generated them.Game asset libraryKeep approved outputs connected to asset records and source links.Visual identitiesKeep review decisions connected to reusable creative direction.