Background - Esin-M/FlUId-VR_UI_Guidelines GitHub Wiki

Current methods for designing virtual 3D interfaces are typically based on direct adaptations of the desktop metaphor and the related "window, icon, menu, pointing device" (WIMP) paradigm, resulting in a user experience gap between physical and virtual reality 1(#ref1). This kind of adaptation is problematic because interaction in 3D virtual environments involves mapping traditional 2D input devices to 3D space, which limits how content is perceived when 3D elements are shown as 2D rendered images 2(#ref2).

Unlike conventional 2D interfaces used on desktops and mobile devices, VR environments do not have fixed boundaries for UI placement, which makes conventional UI design principles less directly applicable 3(#ref3). VR introduces distinct challenges and factors such as field of view, user orientation, absence of a defined reference plane, and depth-related complexities that differ significantly from flat 2D displays need to be considered 4(#ref4). Moving from 2D to 3D increases the degrees of freedom from 2 to 6 due to the simulation of a third dimension where users can interact more freely, and constant adjustment of the viewpoint based on head movement enhances immersion but also adds to the complexity 5(#ref5).

Three-dimensional GUIs lack comprehensive design heuristics, and understanding cognitive workload of such systems requires considering different variables including field of view, physical and mental demand that increase workload in three-dimensional interfaces 6(#ref6). Well-known screen-interaction guidelines for WIMP or touch can only be transferred into VR conditionally 5(#ref5). VR design should not happen by directly transferring 2D practices to 3D, but finding a new paradigm that requires designers to expand their expertise to different fields such as psychology, architecture, sound design, lighting design, and physics 7(#ref7)

The fundamental differences between 2D and 3D interaction paradigms, combined with VR's unique technological and cognitive challenges, necessitate specialized design guidelines specifically developed for virtual reality user interfaces.

References

1(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351982382_Exploring_Button_Designs_for_Mid-air_Interaction_in_Virtual_Reality_A_Hexa-metric_Evaluation_of_Key_Representations_and_Multi-modal_Cues) C. Bermejo, L. H. Lee, P. Chojecki, D. Przewozny, and P. Hui, “Exploring Button Designs for Mid-air Interaction in Virtual Reality: A Hexa-metric Evaluation of Key Representations and Multi-modal Cues” Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., vol. 5, no. EICS, pp. 1–26, May 2021, doi: 10.1145/3457141.

2(https://dblp.org/rec/conf/chitaly/Caputo17.html) F. M. Caputo, “Gestural interaction in Virtual Environments: user studies and applications” 2019.

3(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384733715_A_Pilot_Study_on_Hand-Referenced_Menu_User_Interfaces_for_Head-Mounted_Display_Virtual_Reality) R. Pandey and K. Sorathia, “A Pilot Study on Hand-Referenced Menu User Interfaces for Head-Mounted Display Virtual Reality” in Proceedings of the 27th International Academic Mindtrek Conference, Tampere Finland: ACM, Oct. 2024, pp. 260–263. doi: 10.1145/3681716.3689445.

4(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330248538_Exploring_3D_Interactions_for_Number_Entry_and_Menu_Selection_in_Virtual_Reality_Environment_Proceedings_of_ICoRD_2019_Volume_2) A. Kaur, A. Agrawal, and P. Yammiyavar, “Exploring 3D Interactions for Number Entry and Menu Selection in Virtual Reality Environment” in Research into Design for a Connected World, vol. 135, A. Chakrabarti, Ed., in Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol. 135. , Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019, pp. 781–791. doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-5977-4_66.

5(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328133856_What_User_Interface_to_Use_for_Virtual_Reality_2D_3D_or_Speech-A_User_Study) Y. WeiB, D. Hepperle, A. SieB, and M. Wolfel, “What User Interface to Use for Virtual Reality? 2D, 3D or Speech–A User Study” in 2018 International Conference on Cyberworlds (CW), Singapore: IEEE, Oct. 2018, pp. 50–57. doi: 10.1109/CW.2018.00021.

6(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344089333_A_cognitive_load_assessment_study_of_three-dimensional_interactive_virtual_reality_interfaces) A. Kaur, M. Agrawal, and P. G. Yammiyavar, “A cognitive load assessment study of three-dimensional interactive virtual reality interfaces” 2020.

7(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320623305_BEST_PRACTICES_FOR_DESIGNING_USER_EXPERIENCE_FOR_INTERNET_OF_THINGS_AND_VIRTUAL_REALITY?_sg=AL2Livy4BJw555VUnC6esWjy9srN7B9JyRWkQ_1RZgmU2S1CHHrLfnQiny3Kk_b9oVvB_iRri50yrfY&_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QifX0) E. Shoikova and A. Peshev, “BEST PRACTICES FOR DESIGNING USER EXPERIENCE FOR INTERNET OF THINGS AND VIRTUAL REALITY” 2017.