Social Virtual Reality Platform Comparison and Evaluation Using a Guided Group Walkthrough Method

Abstract

As virtual reality (VR) headsets become more commercially accessible, a range of social platforms have been developed that exploit the immersive nature of these systems. There is a growing interest in using these platforms in social and work contexts, but relatively little work into examining the usability choices that have been made. We developed a usability inspection method based on cognitive walkthrough that we call guided group walkthrough. Guided group walkthrough is applied to existing social VR platforms by having a guide walk the participants through a series of abstract social tasks that are common across the platforms. Using this method we compared six social VR platforms for the Oculus Quest. After constructing an appropriate task hierarchy and walkthrough question structure for social VR, we ran several groups of participants through the walkthrough process. We undercover usability challenges that are common across the platforms, identify specific design considerations and comment on the utility of the walkthrough method in this situation.

Ubiq-exp: A toolkit to build and run remote and distributed mixed reality experiments

“…Schulz's blog lists over 160 at the time of writing Schulz (2021). These systems support a wide variety of avatar and interaction styles, see reviews in Kolesnichenko et al (2019); Jonas et al (2019); Tanenbaum et al (2020); Liu and Steed (2021).…”

Ubiq: A System to Build Flexible Social Virtual Reality Experiences

“…This example provides a starting point to explore more complex simulations involving physics, prediction and compression. [38] along with their analysis of six well-known social VR systems: VRChat [65], RecRoom [50], AltSpaceVR [42], BigScreen [2] , Spatial [56], and Mozilla Hubs [45]. Their model breaks down tasks, such as finding other users, into interaction cycles that classify how the system is used to achieve a goal -or whether it is even possible.…”

“…However, different SVRs & CVEs vary significantly in the types of avatars they present, the forms of their 3D user interfaces, and the functionality afforded by the environment. Recent surveys inventory the diverse design choices made [29,31] or compare the support for specific collaborative tasks [38].…”

Integrating Rocketbox Avatars with the Ubiq Social VR platform

“…To this day, comparison of current commercial and research SVR experiences shows the lack of support of some key social features around group coordination and user representations. There should be more support of emotion and gesture display as non-verbal communication plays an important part in the quality of group interactions [8,9]. Recent taxonomies [6][7][8]14] of SVR systems highlight the lack of support for common conventions in avatars' creation, representation and controls.…”

“…There should be more support of emotion and gesture display as non-verbal communication plays an important part in the quality of group interactions [8,9]. Recent taxonomies [6][7][8]14] of SVR systems highlight the lack of support for common conventions in avatars' creation, representation and controls. Ultimately, avatars take an important part in the users' experience of SVR systems, in their interactions with others, and in the construction of digital identities [2].…”