Presence when interacting with Graphical User Interfaces in Virtual Reality A Qualitative Study of Tutorials in Virtual Reality Games Master’s thesis in Computer Science and Engineering ROBIN LILIUS-LUNDMARK DAVID TORBJÖRNSSON Department of Computer Science and Engineering CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG Gothenburg, Sweden 2020 Master’s thesis 2020 Presence when interacting with Graphical User Interfaces in Virtual Reality A Qualitative Study of Tutorials in Virtual Reality Games ROBIN LILIUS-LUNDMARK DAVID TORBJÖRNSSON Department of Computer Science and Engineering Chalmers University of Technology University of Gothenburg Gothenburg, Sweden 2020 Presence when interacting with Graphical User Interfaces in Virtual Reality A Qualitative Study of Tutorials in Virtual Reality Games ROBIN LILIUS-LUNDMARK DAVID TORBJÖRNSSON © ROBIN LILIUS-LUNDMARK, 2020. © DAVID TORBJÖRNSSON, 2020. Supervisor: Thommy Eriksson, Department of Computer Science and Engineering Advisor: Kristoffer Benjaminsson, Fast Travel Games Examiner: Staffan Björk, Department of Computer Science and Engineering Master’s Thesis 2020 Department of Computer Science and Engineering Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg SE-412 96 Gothenburg Telephone +46 31 772 1000 Cover: The scene and play area for Puzzle 1 and Tutorial C, viewed from above (see Section 6.3 for more details). Typeset in LATEX Gothenburg, Sweden 2020 iv Presence when interacting with Graphical User Interfaces in Virtual Reality A Qualitative Study of Tutorials in Virtual Reality Games ROBIN LILIUS-LUNDMARK DAVID TORBJÖRNSSON Department of Computer Science and Engineering Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg Abstract When developing games for virtual reality (VR), presence – a sense of “being there” in the virtual environment – is an important aspect to take into account, especially when designing tutorials to those games. The reason for this is the often negative impact graphical user interfaces can have on a user’s sense of presence. This mas- ter’s thesis has therefore investigated what factors that needs to be considered, and how these factors should be used, in order to not break presence when designing tutorials for VR games. We have achieved this by designing and developing a VR game that contains three different tutorial interfaces, designed to induce different amounts of presence in a user. These three tutorial prototypes has been tested by VR users, and then compared and evaluated through qualitative interviews and the Igroup Presence Questionnaire. Finally, the resulting data was coded, analyzed and summarized into 20 general guidelines for designing tutorials for presence in VR. The result partially followed notions from previous studies, but also revealed some interesting angles on the subject. This study is entirely qualitative and has not been controlled for statistical significance, neither have the guidelines been prac- tically tested yet, so one should be aware of the possibility of different outcomes due to differences in circumstances when applying them. Although not an entirely complete and absolute solution to the problem, we hope that these guidelines can help developers in this area, and perhaps act as stepping stones for future studies on the subject. The prototypes can be downloaded and played at itch.io[1] and the project files are also available on Github[2]. Keywords: Interaction design, thesis, virtual reality, VR, interface, tutorial, pres- ence, immersion, diegesis, qualitative. v Acknowledgements We want to thank our supervisor Thommy Eriksson for his help and technical sup- port during this project, not the least when the Covid-19 pandemic hit us all hard. This project has also been executed in collaboration with Fast Travel Games in general and Kristoffer Benjaminsson specifically, that helped us out with both their expertise in the field of VR, and the equipment that we needed to carry out this project. Lastly, we want to thank all of the testers that helped us and gave us feedback on the prototypes, without whom we would not have been able to finish this project. A last mention also goes out to those that wanted to test before the pandemic hit, yet didn’t have opportunity to, afterwards. Robin Lilius-Lundmark & David Torbjörnsson, Gothenburg, June 2020 vii Contents List of Figures xiii List of Tables xv 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Research problem . 2 1.2 Research question . 2 1.3 Aim . 2 1.4 Delimitations . 2 2 Background 5 2.1 Stakeholders . 5 2.2 VR games . 6 2.2.1 Tutorials . 7 3 Theory 11 3.1 Presence . 11 3.1.1 Measuring presence . 11 3.1.2 Factors that influence presence . 12 3.2 Immersion . 13 3.3 Narrative and involvement . 14 3.4 Diegesis . 15 3.5 Tutorials . 16 4 Methodology 17 4.1 Pre-study . 17 4.2 Prototype development . 17 4.3 Data collection . 18 4.3.1 Playtests . 19 4.3.2 Questionnaire . 19 4.3.3 Interviews . 20 4.4 Data analysis . 20 5 Planning 23 5.1 Initial plans . 23 5.1.1 Order of process . 23 5.1.2 Basic time plan . 24 ix Contents 5.2 Refined plans . 24 5.2.1 Planned result . 25 5.2.2 Plan of process . 25 5.2.2.1 Planning development . 25 5.2.2.2 Planned playtest . 25 5.2.2.3 Planned analysis . 26 5.2.3 Time plan . 26 6 Process 29 6.1 Pre-Study . 29 6.1.1 Literature review . 29 6.1.2 VR game review . 30 6.1.3 Revising the plan . 33 6.1.4 Further plans and decisions . 34 6.2 Design . 34 6.2.1 Puzzles . 34 6.2.2 Tutorials . 37 6.2.3 Environment . 38 6.3 Development . 39 6.3.1 Environment setup . 40 6.3.2 Puzzles . 41 6.3.3 Tutorials . 44 6.3.4 Covid-19 pandemic and revisions to the plan . 47 6.4 Testing . 48 6.5 Data Analysis . 51 6.5.1 Deductive content analysis . 51 6.5.2 Factor analysis . 53 6.5.3 Quantitative findings . 54 7 Results 55 7.1 Prototype . 56 7.2 Quantitative data . 58 7.2.1 Data from questionnaires . 58 7.2.2 Data from coded interviews . 62 7.3 Qualitative analysis . 65 7.3.1 Factor analysis . 65 7.3.2 Tutorial design guidelines for presence in VR . 76 7.3.2.1 Very strong guidelines . 77 7.3.2.2 Strong guidelines . 78 7.3.2.3 Less strong guidelines . 79 7.3.2.4 Weaker guidelines . 80 7.3.2.5 A final note on factor importance . 82 8 Discussion 85 8.1 Discussion of Process . 85 8.1.1 Pre-study . 85 8.1.2 Design . 86 x Contents 8.1.3 Development . 86 8.1.4 The effects of the Covid-19 virus pandemic . 87 8.1.5 Testing . 88 8.1.6 Data analysis . 89 8.2 Discussion of results . 90 8.2.1 Quantitative result . 90 8.2.2 Qualitative result . 91 8.3 Future work . 92 9 Conclusion 95 Bibliography 99 A VR game review, extended I B Data from coded interviews, extended V C Consent form XI D Igroup presence questionnaire XV xi Contents xii List of Figures 1.1 Left: In-game button-prompt in Celeste[3], Right: in-game instruc- tions all at once in The Binding of Isaac[4]. 2 2.1 Games from top left: Apex Construct[5], Creed: Rise to Glory[6], The Curious Tale of the Stolen Pets[7], Until You Fall[8], Boneworks[9], Budget Cuts 2 [10]. 6 2.2 Tutorial screen on a TV in Boneworks[9]. 7 2.3 Tutorial screen for blocking in Until You Fall[8]. 8 3.1 Non-diegetic user interfaces of Team Fortress 2 [11] and diegetic user interfaces of Dead Space[12]. 15 6.1 An Affinity Diagram based on different factors that affect presence in virtual environments, according to the results of the pre-study. 30 6.2 Teleportation arc and using tools in Budget Cuts 2 [10] . 31 6.3 A lot of non-diegetic information in Until You Fall[8] . 32 6.4 Whiteboard sketches of the different puzzles . 35 6.5 Paper and styrofoam prototyping. 36 6.6 To the left: a sketch of Tutorial C, and to the right: a sketch of Tutorial B. 38 6.7 Ideating the environment on a whiteboard. 39 6.8 An early development environment. 40 6.9 Puzzle 1 with attachable tile. 42 6.10 Puzzle 2 with the interface hints before rotating. 43 6.11 Scanner and cube in Puzzle 3. 43 6.12 Left: the wrong solution and blinking red light. Right: the correct solution and a blinking green light. 44 6.13 First instruction screen for Puzzle 1 in Tutorial B. 45 6.14 First instruction screen for Puzzle 1 in Tutorial C. 46 6.15 First instruction screen for Puzzle 1 in Tutorial A. 46 6.16 A user play testing Puzzle 1 with Tutorial C, at a home based working station. 49 7.1 An overlook of the environment for Puzzle 1 and Tutorial C. 55 7.2 Puzzle 1.