Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
133 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Outstanding: A Multi-Perspective Travel Approach for Virtual Reality Games (1908.00379v2)

Published 1 Aug 2019 in cs.HC

Abstract: In virtual reality games, players dive into fictional environments and can experience a compelling and immersive world. State-of-the-art VR systems allow for natural and intuitive navigation through physical walking. However, the tracking space is still limited, and viable alternatives are required to reach further virtual destinations. Our work focuses on the exploration of vast open worlds - an area where existing local navigation approaches such as the arc-based teleport are not ideally suited and world-in-miniature techniques potentially reduce presence. We present a novel alternative for open environments: Our idea is to equip players with the ability to switch from first-person to a third-person bird's eye perspective on demand. From above, players can command their avatar and initiate travels over large distance. Our evaluation reveals a significant increase in spatial orientation while avoiding cybersickness and preserving presence, enjoyment, and competence. We summarize our findings in a set of comprehensive design guidelines to help developers integrate our technique.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (56)
  1. I’m a Giant: Walking in Large Virtual Environments at High Speed Gains. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 522.
  2. Ferran Argelaguet and Morgant Maignant. 2016. GiAnt: stereoscopic-compliant multi-scale navigation in VEs. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. ACM, 269–277.
  3. Laurenz Berger and Katrin Wolf. 2018. WIM: Fast Locomotion in Virtual Reality with Spatial Orientation Gain & without Motion Sickness. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. ACM, 19–24.
  4. Scot Best. 1996. Perceptual and oculomotor implications of interpupillary distance settings on a head-mounted virtual display. In Aerospace and Electronics Conference, 1996. NAECON 1996., Proceedings of the IEEE 1996 National, Vol. 1. IEEE, 429–434.
  5. Legomotion: Scalable Walking-based Virtual Locomotion. In Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (VRST ’17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 18, 8 pages. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3139131.3139133 
  6. Frank Biocca and Ben Delaney. 1995. Communication in the Age of Virtual Reality. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA, Chapter Immersive Virtual Reality Technology, 57–124. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=207922.207926
  7. The jumper metaphor: an effective navigation technique for immersive display setups. In Proceedings of Virtual Reality International Conference.
  8. Immersion in digital games: review of gaming experience research. Handbook of digital games (2014), 337–361.
  9. Evaluating dynamic-adjustment of stereo view parameters in a multi-scale virtual environment. In 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), 2014 IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, 91–98.
  10. HTC Corporation. 2018. HTC Vive. Website. (2018). Retrieved July 14, 2018 from https://www.vive.com/us/product/vive-virtual-reality-system/.
  11. U. Q.O. Cyberpsychology Lab. 2004. Presence Questionnaire: Revised by the UQO Cyberpsychology Lab. (2004). http://w3.uqo.ca/cyberpsy/docs/qaires/pres/PQ_va.pdf
  12. A psychophysically calibrated controller for navigating through large environments in a limited free-walking space. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. ACM, 157–164.
  13. Ajoy S Fernandes and Steven K Feiner. 2016. Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification. In 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), 2016 IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, 201–210.
  14. Effects of controller-based locomotion on player experience in a virtual reality exploration game. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games.
  15. First-and Third-Person Perspectives in immersive Virtual Environments: Presence and Performance analysis of embodied Users. Frontiers in Robotics and AI (2017).
  16. Revisiting Detection Thresholds for Redirected Walking: Combining Translation and Curvature Gains. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Perception (SAP ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 113–120. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2931002.2931018 
  17. HCI Lessons From PlayStation VR. In Extended Abstracts Publication of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY ’17 Extended Abstracts). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 125–135. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3130859.3131437 
  18. Carrie Heeter. 1992. Being there: The subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 1, 2 (1992), 262–271.
  19. Vection and simulator sickness. 2 (02 1990), 171–81.
  20. Lawrence J Hettinger and Gary E Riccio. 1992. Visually induced motion sickness in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 1, 3 (1992), 306–310.
  21. Presence: concept, determinants, and measurement. (2000). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.387188 
  22. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (1993). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0303{_}3 
  23. Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The international journal of aviation psychology 3, 3 (1993).
  24. Simulator sickness in US Navy flight simulators. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 60, 1 (1989), 10–16.
  25. Eugenia M Kolasinski. 1995. Simulator Sickness in Virtual Environments. Technical Report. Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA.
  26. Design and evaluation of navigation techniques for multiscale virtual environments. In Virtual Reality Conference, 2006. Ieee, 175–182.
  27. GulliVR: A Walking-Oriented Technique for Navigation in Virtual Reality Games Based on Virtual Body Resizing. In Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play. ACM, 243–256.
  28. Subliminal reorientation and repositioning in virtual reality during eye blinks. In Proceedings of the 2016 Symposium on Spatial User Interaction. ACM, 213–213.
  29. Joseph J LaViola Jr. 2000. A discussion of cybersickness in virtual environments. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin 32, 1 (2000), 47–56.
  30. Hands-free multi-scale navigation in virtual environments. In Proceedings of the 2001 symposium on Interactive 3D graphics. ACM, 9–15.
  31. Estimating the Simulator Sickness in Immersive Virtual Reality with Optical Flow Analysis. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2017 Posters (SA ’17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 16, 2 pages. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3145690.3145697 
  32. Effects of field of view on presence, enjoyment, memory, and simulator sickness in a virtual environment. In Virtual Reality, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE. IEEE, 164–171.
  33. Matthew Lombard and Theresa Ditton. 1997. At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3, 2 (1997), 0–0.
  34. Effects of speed and transitions on target-based travel techniques. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. ACM, 327–328.
  35. K E Money. 1970. Motion sickness. Physiological Reviews 50, 1 (1970), 1–39.
  36. Autonomic responses during motion sickness induced by virtual reality. Auris Nasus Larynx 34, 3 (2007), 303–306.
  37. Sharif Razzaque. 2005. Redirected walking. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
  38. Redirected walking. In Proceedings of EUROGRAPHICS, Vol. 9. Citeseer, 105–106.
  39. James T Reason and Joseph John Brand. 1975. Motion sickness. Academic press.
  40. Roy A Ruddle and Simon Lessels. 2009. The benefits of using a walking interface to navigate virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 16, 1 (2009), 5.
  41. Richard M Ryan and Edward L Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist 55, 1 (2000), 68.
  42. The Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self-Determination Theory Approach. Motivation and Emotion 30, 4 (2006), 344–360. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8 
  43. The benefits of third-person perspective in virtual and augmented reality?. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. ACM, 27–30.
  44. Decomposing the sense of presence: Factor analytic insights. In 2nd international workshop on presence, Vol. 1999.
  45. William R Sherman and Alan B Craig. 2002. Understanding virtual reality: Interface, application, and design. Elsevier.
  46. Mel Slater. 2003. A note on presence terminology. Presence connect 3, 3 (2003), 1–5.
  47. Taking steps: the influence of a walking technique on presence in virtual reality. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 2, 3 (1995), 201–219.
  48. Cybersickness is Not Simulator Sickness. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 41, 2 (1997), 1138–1142. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107118139704100292 
  49. Virtual reality on a WIM: interactive worlds in miniature. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, 265–272.
  50. Unity Technologies. 2018. Unity. Website. (2018). Retrieved March 29, 2018 from https://unity3d.com/.
  51. Sam Tregillus and Eelke Folmer. 2016. Vr-step: Walking-in-place using inertial sensing for hands free navigation in mobile vr environments. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1250–1255.
  52. Walking> walking-in-place> flying, in virtual environments. In Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 359–364.
  53. Cyber sick but still having fun. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. ACM, 325–326.
  54. Bob G. Witmer and Michael J. Singer. 1998. Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence 7, 3 (1998), 225–240.
  55. Oculus vr best practices guide. Oculus VR (2014), 27–39.
  56. Xiaolong Zhang and George W. Furnas. 2002. Social Interactions in Multiscale CVEs. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVE ’02). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 31–38. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/571878.571884 
Citations (39)

Summary

  • The paper introduces a dual-perspective navigation method that integrates first-person and third-person views to enhance spatial awareness in VR.
  • It demonstrates that the approach significantly reduces spatial disorientation and cybersickness compared to traditional teleportation techniques.
  • User studies confirm improved task performance and immersive experience in expansive virtual environments.

Exploration of Dynamic Perspective Switching for VR Navigation

The paper presents "Outstanding: A Multi-Perspective Travel Approach," introducing a novel navigation technique tailored for virtual reality (VR) games, emphasizing large-scale exploratory experiences. This research, undertaken by Sebastian Cmentowski, Andrey Krekhov, and Jens Krüger, evaluates the limitations of current VR locomotion methods—particularly the arc-based teleportation—and proposes a dual-perspective switching mechanism to enhance spatial orientation and mitigate cybersickness in expansive virtual environments.

Problem Statement and Motivation

Current VR navigation techniques like room-scale physical walking and teleportation exhibit limitations when applied to vast open worlds. While the former is naturally intuitive, it is constrained by physical space. Teleportation, although effective for medium-range movement, often results in spatial disorientation and reduces presence due to abrupt transitions. This paper critiques the inefficiency of these techniques in fostering an immersive experience for expansive environment exploration, which prompted the development of an innovative solution focused on dynamic perspective switching between first-person (1PP) and third-person perspectives (3PP).

Proposed Solution

The research proposes a technique in which users can seamlessly switch between a first-person and a third-person bird's eye view. In 1PP, players interact and engage with the environment locally, while 3PP enables distant navigation with an elevated perspective, akin to viewing a map from above. The technique aims to leverage the strengths of both perspectives—1PP's detailed interaction capabilities and 3PP's superior spatial awareness—balancing interaction intensity with comprehensive environmental perception. A smooth, fast transformation between these perspectives was designed to minimize cybersickness, a common ailment when incongruity arises between visual stimuli and physical perception.

Experimental Design and Evaluation

The approach was implemented in a VR scenario, testing it against traditional teleportation in a user paper involving a large-scale virtual environment. The paper focused on multiple metrics: task performance, spatial orientation, presence, enjoyment, and cybersickness incidence. The findings indicated that switching perspectives significantly improved spatial orientation without compromising presence and enjoyment, aligning with the hypothesis that virtual scaling and perspective-switching can enhance user experience in VR travel tasks.

Numerical and Qualitative Insights

Quantitative results showcased a marked reduction in spatial disorientation and a substantial increase in navigational efficacy, as users effectively transitioned through the game world. Notably, the technique did not induce additional cybersickness, demonstrating the viability of the perspective switching concept in preserving physical comfort. Qualitative feedback underscored the intuitive nature of the technique once users acclimated to it, with many participants appreciating the balanced approach to navigation and interaction provided by the dual perspectives.

Implications and Future Directions

This research holds significant implications for VR game design and virtual environment exploration. By highlighting a new paradigm for VR navigation, it encourages developers to consider dual-perspective mechanisms, facilitating more intricate interactions within vast spaces without compromising user experience. Future exploration may delve into refining transition dynamics, integrating additional control mechanisms for streamlined avatar guidance, and expanding the approach to varied applications beyond gaming, such as virtual exhibitions and educational simulations.

While this paper successfully addresses existing locomotion challenges in open-world VR scenarios, further work is essential to enhance functionality in enclosed or multi-level environments. Future research should explore adaptive scaling techniques, alternative interaction methods for confined spaces, and the application of this navigation technique across different genres and VR platforms.

In conclusion, the paper offers a comprehensive examination of VR navigation, providing valuable insights for overcoming challenges associated with large virtual environments, while maintaining user engagement and minimizing cybersickness. This approach opens new avenues for immersive and accessible VR experiences, potentially transforming how users interact with and traverse virtual worlds.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com