Exploring the Effects of Different Asymmetric Game Designs on User Experience in Collaborative Virtual Reality

TL;DR

This paper investigates how asymmetric game designs in collaborative VR affect user experience and usability. Using Mission: Clear Candy, the authors implement four variants that manipulate environment sharing and interdependence between a VR agent and a non-HMD hacker, evaluating outcomes with a between-subjects study (N=74) across multiple UX/PX measures. The Best-Fit framework guides design choices, and results show that variations in player dependency influence pragmatic UX, usability, control, and intrinsic motivation, while shared versus separated environments largely do not; social presence remains high across conditions. The findings offer design guidance for creating engaging, socially rich asymmetric VR experiences and highlight the importance of addressing usability in high-dependency scenarios, with future work focusing on puzzle redesign and larger samples.

Abstract

The risk of isolation in virtual reality (VR) stems from the immersive nature of the technology. VR can transport users to entirely virtual environments, often disconnecting them from the physical world and real-life interactions. Asymmetric multiplayer options have been explored to address this issue and encourage social interaction by requiring players to communicate and collaborate to achieve common objectives. Nevertheless, research on implementing these designs and their effects is limited, mainly due to the novelty of multiplayer VR gaming. This article investigates how different game design approaches affect the player experience during an asymmetric multiplayer VR game. Four versions of a VR experience were created and tested in a study involving 74 participants. Each version differs in terms of the sharing of virtual environments (shared vs separated) and the players' dependency on the experience (mutual vs unidirectional). The results showed that variations in game design influenced aspects of the player experience, such as system usability, pragmatic UX quality, immersion control, and intrinsic motivation. Notably, the player roles and the co-presence in the virtual environment did not simultaneously impact these aspects, suggesting that the degree to which players depend on each other changes the player experience.

Figures (4)

• Figure 1: a) Study settings: Two participants playing Mission: Clear Clandy. b) A view of the game from the non-HMD point of view. c) A view of the game from the HMD point of view.
• Figure 2: Comparison of average values of the SUS questionnaire for each Version. Versions: A = separated environments, bidirectional player role dependency; B = separated environments, unidirectional player role dependency; C = shared environment, unidirectional player role dependency; D = shared environment, bidirectional player role dependency.
• Figure 3: Comparison of average values of the UEQS questionnaire for each Version (a) and each Role (b). Versions: A = separated environments, bidirectional player role dependency; B = separated environments, unidirectional player role dependency; C = shared environment, unidirectional player role dependency; D = shared environment, bidirectional player role dependency.
• Figure 4: Comparison of average values of the IMI Competence (a) and IEQ Control (b) components for each Version. Versions: A = separated environments, bidirectional player role dependency; B = separated environments, unidirectional player role dependency; C = shared environment, unidirectional player role dependency; D = shared environment, bidirectional player role dependency.