ShareVR: Enabling Co-Located Experiences for Virtual Reality between HMD and Non-HMD Users

CHI, pp. 4021-4033, 2017.

Cited by: 103|Bibtex|Views40|Links
EI
Keywords:
head-mounted displaysimmersive virtual environmentsdesign spacevr experiencevirtual environmentMore(12+)
Weibo:
In this work we presented ShareVR, a proof-of-concept prototype using floor projection and mobile displays in combination with positional tracking to visualize the virtual world for Non-head-mounted displays users and enable them to interact with the head-mounted displays user an...

Abstract:

Virtual reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMD) allow for a highly immersive experience and are currently becoming part of the living room entertainment. Current VR systems focus mainly on increasing the immersion and enjoyment for the user wearing the HMD (HMD user), resulting in all the bystanders (Non-HMD users) being excluded from th...More

Code:

Data:

0
Introduction
  • Virtual Reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMD) are currently getting released as consumer devices (e.g. Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, and PlayStation VR) and are becoming part of the home entertainment environment.
  • The technical progress allows for creating highly immersive virtual environments (IVEs) where users can even physically walk around and interact using their hands [13].
  • Having this physical exploration leads to a higher spatial understanding and further increases immersion and enjoyment for the HMD user [4].
  • The focus of the work was on including the Non-HMD users into the VR experience and enhancing their way to interact with the HMD user
Highlights
  • Virtual Reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMD) are currently getting released as consumer devices (e.g. Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, and PlayStation Virtual Reality) and are becoming part of the home entertainment environment
  • Our work is closely related to Jones et al.’s RoomAlive since we apply a similar approach to visualize the virtual world, but we focus mainly on interaction between head-mounted displays and Non-head-mounted displays users
  • head-mounted displays users reported a significant higher positive experience compared to Non-head-mounted displays players (F(1,15)=11.573, p=0.004, r=0.660)
  • The goal of our study was to examine the impact of ShareVR on enjoyment, presence and social interaction for head-mounted displays and Non-head-mounted displays players in comparison to the Baseline condition
  • Even if no significant differences were found for the Game Experience Questionnaire questionnaire, in the final comparison we found a significantly higher rating of enjoyment using ShareVR for Non-head-mounted displays users
  • In this work we presented ShareVR, a proof-of-concept prototype using floor projection and mobile displays in combination with positional tracking to visualize the virtual world for Non-head-mounted displays users and enable them to interact with the head-mounted displays user and become part of the Virtual Reality experience
Methods
  • Participants For this study the authors recruited

    16 participants (5 female, 11 male) with an average age of 27.63 (SD=3.181).
  • Participants were recruited in pairs and with the premise that they have such a social connection that they feel comfortable playing with each other
  • They reported an average experience with VR devices of 8.76 months (SD=7.22).
  • Significantly higher scores of arousal were reported using ShareVR (M=6.1, SD=1.61) compared to Baseline (M=5.36, SD=1.50) (F(1,15)=7.145, p=0.017, r=0.568), as well as for HMD (M=6.01, SD=1.28) compared to Non-HMD (M=5.31, SD=1.60) (F(1,15)=8.809, p=0.010, r=0.515).
  • Presence Participants felt significantly more present (SUS) using ShareVR (M=4.5, SD=1.3) compared to the Baseline system (M=4.0, SD=1.1) (F(1,15)=10.024, p=0.006, r=0.633) as well as while using an HMD (M=4.9, SD=1.2) compared to NonHMD (M=3.6, SD=1.3) (F(1,15)=52.745, p < 0.001, r=0.882)
Results
  • Scores for positive experience and presence were analysed using a 2x2x2 (System x HMD x Experience) repeated-measures ANOVA.
  • Enjoyment The post-game GEQ consists of four components: positive experience, negative experience, tiredness, and returning to reality.
  • HMD users reported a significant higher positive experience compared to Non-HMD players (F(1,15)=11.573, p=0.004, r=0.660).
  • Non-HMD participants reported significantly higher scores for tiredness using ShareVR compared to Baseline (F(1,15)=12.060, p=0.003, r=0.829).
  • Participants further reported significantly higher scores for “returning to reality” when using an HMD compared to Non-HMD (F(1,15)=33.067, p < 0.001, r=0.668)
Conclusion
  • Discussion of the Online Survey

    The authors' survey identified the users’ desire to be able to actively influence and interact with HMD users while not not having an HMD themselves.
  • When asked about future concepts such a system should have, respondents preferred an asymmetric approach but still were interested in the alternatives
  • This indicated that these design decisions would have to be dependent on the underlying game dynamics.
  • ShareVR did elicit more positive emotions, higher valence and higher arousal which can be both linked to positive player experience [37, 40]
  • These findings further correlate with the observations and qualitative feedback of participants “The author thinks both games should be further developed ...
  • In a final step the authors conducted a short exploratory evaluation (n=6) which the authors used to help them explore the design space of ShareVR and give insights and guidelines for designers of co-located asymmetric VR experiences
Summary
  • Introduction:

    Virtual Reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMD) are currently getting released as consumer devices (e.g. Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, and PlayStation VR) and are becoming part of the home entertainment environment.
  • The technical progress allows for creating highly immersive virtual environments (IVEs) where users can even physically walk around and interact using their hands [13].
  • Having this physical exploration leads to a higher spatial understanding and further increases immersion and enjoyment for the HMD user [4].
  • The focus of the work was on including the Non-HMD users into the VR experience and enhancing their way to interact with the HMD user
  • Objectives:

    Discussion The goal of the study was to examine the impact of ShareVR on enjoyment, presence and social interaction for HMD and Non-HMD players in comparison to the Baseline condition.
  • Methods:

    Participants For this study the authors recruited

    16 participants (5 female, 11 male) with an average age of 27.63 (SD=3.181).
  • Participants were recruited in pairs and with the premise that they have such a social connection that they feel comfortable playing with each other
  • They reported an average experience with VR devices of 8.76 months (SD=7.22).
  • Significantly higher scores of arousal were reported using ShareVR (M=6.1, SD=1.61) compared to Baseline (M=5.36, SD=1.50) (F(1,15)=7.145, p=0.017, r=0.568), as well as for HMD (M=6.01, SD=1.28) compared to Non-HMD (M=5.31, SD=1.60) (F(1,15)=8.809, p=0.010, r=0.515).
  • Presence Participants felt significantly more present (SUS) using ShareVR (M=4.5, SD=1.3) compared to the Baseline system (M=4.0, SD=1.1) (F(1,15)=10.024, p=0.006, r=0.633) as well as while using an HMD (M=4.9, SD=1.2) compared to NonHMD (M=3.6, SD=1.3) (F(1,15)=52.745, p < 0.001, r=0.882)
  • Results:

    Scores for positive experience and presence were analysed using a 2x2x2 (System x HMD x Experience) repeated-measures ANOVA.
  • Enjoyment The post-game GEQ consists of four components: positive experience, negative experience, tiredness, and returning to reality.
  • HMD users reported a significant higher positive experience compared to Non-HMD players (F(1,15)=11.573, p=0.004, r=0.660).
  • Non-HMD participants reported significantly higher scores for tiredness using ShareVR compared to Baseline (F(1,15)=12.060, p=0.003, r=0.829).
  • Participants further reported significantly higher scores for “returning to reality” when using an HMD compared to Non-HMD (F(1,15)=33.067, p < 0.001, r=0.668)
  • Conclusion:

    Discussion of the Online Survey

    The authors' survey identified the users’ desire to be able to actively influence and interact with HMD users while not not having an HMD themselves.
  • When asked about future concepts such a system should have, respondents preferred an asymmetric approach but still were interested in the alternatives
  • This indicated that these design decisions would have to be dependent on the underlying game dynamics.
  • ShareVR did elicit more positive emotions, higher valence and higher arousal which can be both linked to positive player experience [37, 40]
  • These findings further correlate with the observations and qualitative feedback of participants “The author thinks both games should be further developed ...
  • In a final step the authors conducted a short exploratory evaluation (n=6) which the authors used to help them explore the design space of ShareVR and give insights and guidelines for designers of co-located asymmetric VR experiences
Related work
  • Our work builds upon three general fields of research: Collaborative/Spatial Augmented Reality, Collaborative Virtual Environments and Asymmetric Co-located VR Gaming. We will not specifically focus on prior art having a different research direction but sharing a similar technical setup such as [38, 43].

    Collaborative/Spatial Augmented Reality Since presented in 1998 by Raskar et al [51], spatial augmented reality aims to augment the environment by using projection technology instead of head mounted displays [35, 34]. The field is closely related to projector camera systems which were developed to enable these kind of experiences [50]. A recent example of this approach is RoomAlive by Jones et al which is closely related to our work [34]. Using a set of projector camera systems, an approach to transform the living room into a gaming environment and enable multiple users to play and interact together was presented. This work beautifully displays and explores the design space of spatial augmented reality inside the living room. Our work is closely related to Jones et al.’s RoomAlive since we apply a similar approach to visualize the virtual world, but we focus mainly on interaction between HMD and Non-HMD users.
Funding
  • This work was conducted within SFB/TRR 62 Companion Technology for Cognitive Technical Systems funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG)
Reference
  • Hrvoje Benko, Edward W Ishak, and Steven Feiner. 2004. Collaborative mixed reality visualization of an archaeological excavation. In Mixed and Augmented Reality, 2004. ISMAR 2004. Third IEEE and ACM International Symposium on. IEEE, 132–140.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Mark Billinghurst and Hirokazu Kato. 2002. Collaborative Augmented Reality. Commun. ACM 45, 7 (July 2002), 64–70. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/514236.514265
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Mark Billinghurst, Ivan Poupyrev, Hirokazu Kato, and Richard May. 2000. Mixing realities in shared space: An augmented reality interface for collaborative computing. In Multimedia and Expo, 2000. ICME 2000. 2000 IEEE International Conference on, Vol. 3. IEEE, 1641–1644.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Doug A. Bowman and Ryan P. McMahan. 2007. Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough? Computer 40, 7 (July 2007), 36–43. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2007.257
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Margaret M Bradley and Peter J Lang. 1994. Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry 25, 1 (1994), 49–59.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Raffaello Brondi, Leila Alem, Giovanni Avveduto, Claudia Faita, Marcello Carrozzino, Franco Tecchia, and Massimo Bergamasco. 2015. Evaluating the Impact of Highly Immersive Technologies and Natural Interaction on Player Engagement and Flow Experience in Games. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 169–181. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24589-8_13
    Findings
  • Andreas Butz, Tobias Hollerer, Steven Feiner, Blair MacIntyre, and Clifford Beshers. 1999. Enveloping users and computers in a collaborative 3D augmented reality. In Augmented Reality, 1999.(IWAR’99) Proceedings. 2nd IEEE and ACM International Workshop on. IEEE, 35–44.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Christer Carlsson and Olof Hagsand. 1993. DIVE A multi-user virtual reality system. In Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 1993., 1993 IEEE. IEEE, 394–400.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Lung-Pan Cheng, Patrick Lühne, Pedro Lopes, Christoph Sterz, and Patrick Baudisch. 2014. Haptic Turk: A Motion Platform Based on People. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3463–3472. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557101
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Lung-Pan Cheng, Thijs Roumen, Hannes Rantzsch, Sven Köhler, Patrick Schmidt, Robert Kovacs, Johannes Jasper, Jonas Kemper, and Patrick Baudisch. 2015. TurkDeck: Physical Virtual Reality Based on People. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software &#38; Technology (UIST ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 417–426. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2807442.2807463
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Elizabeth F Churchill and Dave Snowdon. 1998. Collaborative virtual environments: an introductory review of issues and systems. Virtual Reality 3, 1 (1998), 3–15.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • K. Coninx, F. Van Reeth, and E. Flerackers. 1997. A Hybrid 2D / 3D User Interface for Immersive Object Modeling. In Proceedings of the 1997 Conference on Computer Graphics International (CGI ’97). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 47–. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=792756.792856
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • HTC Corporation. 2016a. HTC Vive. https://www.htcvive.com. (2016). Accessed:2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • Sony Corporation. 2016b. PlayStation VR. https://www.playstation.com/en-us/explore/playstation-vr/. (2016). Accessed:2016-09-19.
    Findings
  • N. J. Dedual, O. Oda, and S. K. Feiner. 2011. Creating hybrid user interfaces with a 2D multi-touch tabletop and a 3D see-through head-worn display. In 2011 10th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality. 231–232. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2011.6092391
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Die Gute Fabrik. 2016. Johann Sebastian Joust. Game [PlayStation 4]. (2016). Die Gute Fabrik, Copenhagen, DK.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Thierry Duval and Cédric Fleury. 2009. An asymmetric 2d pointer/3d ray for 3d interaction within collaborative virtual environments. In Proceedings of the 14th international Conference on 3D Web Technology. ACM, 33–41.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Kevin Fan, Liwei Chan, Daiya Kato, Kouta Minamizawa, and Masahiko Inami. 2016. VR Planet: Interface for Meta-view and Feet Interaction of VR Contents. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2016 VR Village (SIGGRAPH ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 24, 2 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2929490.2931001
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Foreign VR. 2016. Ruckus Ridge VR Party. Game [HTC Vive]. (2016). Foreign VR, Palo Alto, USA.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Brian Gajadhar, Yvonne de Kort, and Wijnand IJsselsteijn. 2008. Influence of Social Setting on Player Experience of Digital Games. In CHI ’08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3099–3104. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1358628.1358814
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Yue Gao and Regan Mandryk. 2012. The Acute Cognitive Benefits of Casual Exergame Play. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1863–1872. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208323
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Chaim Gartenberg. 2015. The future of gaming is lonely (and online only). (June 2015). http://www.theverge.com/ 2015/6/25/8844073/goodbye-local-multiplayer-we-willmiss-you-and-the-goldeneye-days-of-yore Accessed: 2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • Google. 2016. Tilt Brush. https://www.tiltbrush.com/. (2016). Accessed:2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • Jan Gugenheimer. 2016. Nomadic Virtual Reality: Exploring New Interaction Concepts for Mobile Virtual Reality Head-Mounted Displays. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’16 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 9–12. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2984751.2984783
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Jan Gugenheimer, David Dobbelstein, Christian Winkler, Gabriel Haas, and Enrico Rukzio. 2016a. FaceTouch: Enabling Touch Interaction in Display Fixed UIs for Mobile Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 49–60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984576
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Jan Gugenheimer, Frank Honold, Dennis Wolf, Felix Schüssel, Julian Seifert, Michael Weber, and Enrico Rukzio. 2016b. How Companion-Technology can Enhance a Multi-Screen Television Experience: A Test Bed for Adaptive Multimodal Interaction in Domestic Environments. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz 30, 1 (2016), 37–44. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13218-015-0395-7
    Findings
  • Jan Gugenheimer, Dennis Wolf, Eythor R. Eiriksson, Pattie Maes, and Enrico Rukzio. 2016c. GyroVR: Simulating Inertia in Virtual Reality Using Head Worn Flywheels. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 227–232. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984535
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Jan Gugenheimer, Dennis Wolf, Gabriel Haas, Sebastian Krebs, and Enrico Rukzio. 2016d. SwiVRChair: A Motorized Swivel Chair to Nudge Users’ Orientation for 360 Degree Storytelling in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1996–2000. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858040
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Roland Holm, Erwin Stauder, Roland Wagner, Markus Priglinger, and Jens Volkert. 2002. A combined immersive and desktop authoring tool for virtual environments. In Virtual Reality, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE. IEEE, 93–100.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Hikaru Ibayashi, Yuta Sugiura, Daisuke Sakamoto, Natsuki Miyata, Mitsunori Tada, Takashi Okuma, Takeshi Kurata, Masaaki Mochimaru, and Takeo Igarashi. 2015. Dollhouse VR: a multi-view, multi-user collaborative design workspace with VR technology. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Emerging Technologies. ACM, 8.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • WA IJsselsteijn, YAW De Kort, and K Poels. 2013. The Game Experience Questionnaire: Development of a self-report measure to assess the psychological impact of digital games. (2013).
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Wijnand IJsselsteijn, Yvonne De Kort, Karolien Poels, Audrius Jurgelionis, and Francesco Bellotti. 2007. Characterising and measuring user experiences in digital games. In International conference on advances in computer entertainment technology, Vol. 2. 27.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Robert Johansen. 1988. Groupware: Computer support for business teams. The Free Press.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Brett Jones, Rajinder Sodhi, Michael Murdock, Ravish Mehra, Hrvoje Benko, Andrew Wilson, Eyal Ofek, Blair MacIntyre, Nikunj Raghuvanshi, and Lior Shapira. 2014. RoomAlive: Magical Experiences Enabled by Scalable, Adaptive Projector-camera Units. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 637–644. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647383
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Brett R. Jones, Hrvoje Benko, Eyal Ofek, and Andrew D. Wilson. 2013. IllumiRoom: Peripheral Projected Illusions for Interactive Experiences. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 869–878. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466112
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Matthew Kay and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2016. ARTool: Aligned Rank Transform for Nonparametric Factorial ANOVAs. https://github.com/mjskay/ARTool R package version 0.10.2.
    Findings
  • J Matias Kivikangas, Guillaume Chanel, Ben Cowley, Inger Ekman, Mikko Salminen, Simo Järvelä, and Niklas Ravaja. 2011. A review of the use of psychophysiological methods in game research. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds 3, 3 (2011), 181–199.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Pascal Knierim, Markus Funk, Thomas Kosch, Anton Fedosov, Tamara Müller, Benjamin Schopf, Marc Weise, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2016. UbiBeam++: Augmenting Interactive Projection with Head-Mounted Displays. In Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (NordiCHI ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 112, 6 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2996747
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Siân E. Lindley, James Le Couteur, and Nadia L. Berthouze. 2008. Stirring Up Experience Through Movement in Game Play: Effects on Engagement and Social Behaviour. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 511–514. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357136
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Regan L. Mandryk and M. Stella Atkins. 2007. A Fuzzy Physiological Approach for Continuously Modeling Emotion During Interaction with Play Technologies. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 65, 4 (April 2007), 329–347. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.11.011
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Joe Marshall, Conor Linehan, and Adrian Hazzard. 2016. Designing brutal multiplayer video games. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2669–2680.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Florian Mueller, Stefan Agamanolis, and Rosalind Picard. 2003. Exertion Interfaces: Sports over a Distance for Social Bonding and Fun. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 561–568. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/642611.642709
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Haruo Noma, Tsutomu Miyasato, and Fumio Kishino. 1996. A Palmtop Display for Dextrous Manipulation with Haptic Sensation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’96). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 126–133. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/238386.238454
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Ohan Oda, Carmine Elvezio, Mengu Sukan, Steven Feiner, and Barbara Tversky. 2015. Virtual Replicas for Remote Assistance in Virtual and Augmented Reality. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software &#38; Technology (UIST ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 405–415. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2807442.2807497
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Jauvane C Oliveira, Xiaojun Shen, and Nicolas D Georganas. 2000. Collaborative virtual environment for industrial training and e-commerce. IEEE VRTS 288 (2000).
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Mat Ombler. 2015. Why Split-Screen Gaming is Dying (And Why We Should Mourn It). http://www.highsnobiety.com/2015/09/09/split-screengaming-dead/. (Sept.2015). Accessed:2016-09-15.
    Findings
  • Oliver Otto, Dave Roberts, and Robin Wolff. 2006. A review on effective closely-coupled collaboration using immersive CVE’s. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM international conference on Virtual reality continuum and its applications. ACM, 145–154.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Robin Parker. 2014. Opinion: Is Split-Screen Dead? http://www.godisageek.com/2014/06/opinion-split-screendead/. (June 2014). Accessed:2016-09-15.
    Findings
  • Danakorn Nincarean Eh Phon, Mohamad Bilal Ali, and Noor Dayana Abd Halim. 2014. Collaborative Augmented Reality in Education: A Review. In Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering (LaTiCE), 2014 International Conference on. IEEE, 78–83.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Ramesh Raskar, Jeroen van Baar, Paul Beardsley, Thomas Willwacher, Srinivas Rao, and Clifton Forlines. 2003. iLamps: Geometrically Aware and Self-configuring Projectors. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3 (July 2003), 809–818. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/882262.882349
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Ramesh Raskar, Greg Welch, and Henry Fuchs. 1998. Spatially augmented reality. In First IEEE Workshop on Augmented Reality (IWAR’98). Citeseer, 11–20.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • SCE Japan Studio. 2016. The Playroom VR. Game [PS4/PS VR]. (2016). SCCE, London, UK.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Dieter Schmalstieg, Anton Fuhrmann, Gerd Hesina, Zsolt Szalavári, L Miguel Encarnaçao, Michael Gervautz, and Werner Purgathofer. 2002. The studierstube augmented reality project. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 11, 1 (2002), 33–54.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Mel Slater, Martin Usoh, and Anthony Steed. 1994. Depth of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 3, 2 (1994), 130–144.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Aaron Stafford, Wayne Piekarski, and Bruce Thomas. 2006. Implementation of God-like Interaction Techniques for Supporting Collaboration Between Outdoor AR and Indoor Tabletop Users. In Proceedings of the 5th IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR ’06). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 165–172. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2006.297809
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Steel Crate Games. 2015. Keep Talking And Nobody Explodes. Game [HTC Vive]. (2015). Steel Crate Games, Ottawa, CA.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Team Future. 2016. Black Hat Cooperative. Game [HTC Vive]. (2016). Team Future, Boston, USA.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • TomorrowTodayLabs. 2016. NewtonVR. https://github.com/TomorrowTodayLabs/NewtonVR. (2016). Accessed:2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • Valve. 2016. Valve Data Suggests Developers Should Seriously Consider Room-Scale VR. http://uploadvr.com/steamvr-usage-data-room-scale/. (2016). Accessed:2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • VALVE. 2016. Virtual Reality - SteamVR featuring the HTC Vive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYfNzhLXYGc. (2016). Accessed:2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • Alladi Venkatesh, Erik Kruse, and Eric Chuan-Fong Shih. 2003. The networked home: an analysis of current developments and future trends. Cognition, Technology & Work 5, 1 (2003), 23–32. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10111-002-0113-8
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Amy Voida, Sheelagh Carpendale, and Saul Greenberg. 2010. The individual and the group in console gaming. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. ACM, 371–380.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Amy Voida and Saul Greenberg. 2009. Wii all play: the console game as a computational meeting place. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1559–1568.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Wikipedia. 2016. Statues (game). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statues_(game). (2016). Accessed:2016-09-07.
    Findings
  • Jacob O Wobbrock, Leah Findlater, Darren Gergle, and James J Higgins. 2011. The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 143–146.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
Your rating :
0

 

Best Paper
Best Paper of CHI, 2017
Tags
Comments