You’re testing virtual reality experiences. What are the most important things to consider?

Ask yourself the question "how will this content be used and where will it be accessed". If you have simple requirements like 360 video perhaps a cheaper three degree of freedom standalone headset will meet your needs. If the user will be engaging with high resolution three dimensional environments then you may need PC powered VR which will likely need to be accessed in fixed locations. You will also need ask what additional hardware or peripherals will be required for the users to interact with the VR experience.

One crucial element is hardware compatibility. VR experiences push the boundaries of processing power and graphics rendering. During testing, it's vital to consider a range of devices – both high-end and budget-friendly options. This will help identify potential barriers for users with varying hardware capabilities. A good strategy for testing in XR (not only VR) should consider the following when assessing hardware compatibility and specs. -Motion Sickness: How can we minimize discomfort and ensure a smooth experience? -Accessibility: Can users with disabilities navigate and interact effectively within the VR world? -Cultural Nuances: How might user experience differ across cultures?

Few things: - Test on a good range of different people - Watch for moments of confusion, if you have to explain & help, then its UX issue - Look for engagement, are users smiling/in moments of flow. Those bits that do that, do more of! - Ask lots of questions after, try and make people be honest. (usually best with people you dont love/know)

The most important thing to consider is the quality of the headset itself. The weight and aesthetics are very important depending on the use cases. If the device is used for learning or training, make sure it’s light weight and does not cause dizziness due to prolonged use.

If you are using PCVR, make sure you PC is VR compatible. you no longer require a beast of a PC to do VR but you also shouldn't use the cheapest Laptop you can find. Make sure you check the minimum specs and compare them to your machine. Unless you are testing an app purchased privately you wont really have a problem with compatibility as you would have got it from a store used by that said headset.

While testing ask yourself "does this experience let the user do what you want them to do in the way they expect to do it". There are numerous other testing considerations as listed in other points here but keeping the frame of intended outcome will provide more insight from the testing process.

Try and see how many features you can do without assistance and how well the tutorial showed you the basics. VR interactions need to feel natural and simple. If you have to stop and think on how to interact with an object then there might be something wrong with the UX design.

For a very intuitive VR experience, the UI should be simplistic and have ease of access to features. Every setting or option should be within 1-2 clicks so that the user feels comfortable. Roomscale or stationary setup should be precise as that determines the user's environment for testing. Passthrough is a prominent feature which helps to analyze the surroundings. Finally, an easy-to-connect and control software for PC which can help in administering VR apps, streaming, file transfer, or high-quality applications should be available. For a better engaging UI, the color contrast should be transitional and not too heavy with bright colors or no blends.

One should consider the application and have lots of imagination. We tend to get stuck on what we already know, therefore, to test a VR experience and see where it can be applied requires some imagination. Once the application is found, then implementation strategy will be easy.

I will not talk about any tool in specific but here is my thought. In addition to hardware considerations, paying attention to software features is crucial for maximizing the potential of your virtual reality experiences. One key aspect to consider is the variety and depth of content available. Opting for platforms or ecosystems with a diverse range of experiences, from games and simulations to educational content and virtual tourism etc Furthermore, look for software features that enhance immersion and interactivity. Features such as realistic physics simulations, dynamic environments, and interactive NPCs (non-player characters) can make virtual worlds feel alive and responsive, deepening your sense of presence within them.

The most important thing is the ‘why have you created the project’. Is it to teach something? To show something? To entertain with different modalities? This info will help you to create a better onboard and off boarding process. It will also help you to create a definitive ‘call to action’.

Obviously you'll want to spend a lot of time testing common scenarios of your game/app and how you THINK users will use it. But also do pay attention to edge cases and how your users MIGHT use things that you did not see coming. Nothing beats testing by REAL users. Do not only test yourself or by your team. Have actual users try the experience and carefully monitor what they are doing.

Of course different customers have different experiences, so we try to clarify as much as possible out front. What exactly is the target audience and the situation on location, than we adapt the case as much as possible to get better results. But the on location scenario itself is not so important, since youre wearing googles, headphones and just need enough space to move ;D

Comfort and accessibility. Will the user feel sick after 10 minutes? What if the user has a disability: is the experience such that they're included and comfortable?

It’s important to consider the volume of audio files, and if visual clues are designed and positioned within the User’s peripheral view. (This is easy to miss when testing - look around the 360 at the start and just before the end of a sequence… To see what information falls outside of established global standards. It doesn’t make sense for a User to turn around to click an exit or try again button- and it happens often. The norm is to engineer from a global perspective-however instances occur that run counter culture! A quality test plan includes testing for anomalies.

One of the real strengths of VR is the ability to create highly immersive and engaging experiences that would otherwise be challenging or impossible to recreate. This strength means VR can be an effective modality to train users in highly stressful environments to support exposure and training people in a similar emotional state as when these skills will be applied. Creating these experiences must not be taken lightly however. It is essential that appropriate safety mechanisms be in place to support the user during and following these experiences. These mechanisms could be local or virtual facilitators, employee assistance hotlines or other options.

Give your team time. According to the NIH, the average user experiences simulation sickness after only 10 minutes, and once it sets in it can last from 1 to 4 hours, or even longer. So its critical to establish a healthy cadence for testing. Try to fit tests within 8 minute intervals broken up by at least 8 minute breaks to take notes and reset. For protracted testing days, expect the rest periods to get longer as the session progresses and testers become more susceptible to cybersickness.

The user of a VR experience cannot see the outside world, and needs to physically move to interact with the digital world. Make sure users are not around any objects and make sure the application does not require the user to walk too far, unless it is said up front. Movement can also be tricky if people have disabilities. This is something that could be taken into account when testing an application.

I agree with what was said before and would like to add one crucial consideration: If there is walking/movement involved, please conduct pilot tests in person and keep an eye on your pilot users at all times, especially if they are not familiar with VR. The amount of people I had to stop from running into (physical) walls despite a proper pre-briefing and a virtual as well as physical guarding/boundary would surprise you, so please make sure to keep them safe at all times. Quick design fixes are to place virtual barriers around your user to constrain their movement.

Before testing the app, check what the devs have said its comfort level is and then compare yourself if that is the case. A comfortable app will have no sudden involuntary movements of the user, different types of locomotion, calm environments, and a smooth FPS all round. If one of these are missing then you need to notify the devs. The app should also notify the user if there is anything that may be "triggering" for some users such as dark environments, loud noises, or anything that is a common phobia. VR is more immersive than normal 2D screens so if a user has a clown phobia, sees a clown in VR, and you touch the user they may react in an unpredictable manner that may be unsafe.

Incorporating multiple testers into the mix at different stages of development can yield richer feedback and insights. Each person brings their unique perspective, approach, and objectives to the table. By involving diverse testers, we can gain a multitude of viewpoints on how the app is perceived and experienced. Addressing various user feedback can help refine the app's flow and enhance the immersive interaction, leading to a more universally enjoyable experience.

Recording feedback is critical during the VR experience. Be ready to take notes as the experience plays out. Also, let people have time to think about the experience. I have seen feedback, given a day out of the experience, that contradicts with real-time feedback.

We usually share a QA template with our customers to help collect user feedback. Having a structured approach really helps people to respond more critically to the app.

User feedback is the compass that guides the iterative design of VR experiences. In one project, real-time analytics and user interviews helped us refine a virtual reality learning platform, tailoring it to students' evolving needs. This iterative process, driven by direct user input, ensured the experience remained engaging, educational, and user-centric.

Beta Testing: Conduct beta testing phases where users can try early versions of the VR experience and provide feedback on their experiences. This can help identify issues before a full release. Surveys and Questionnaires: Use surveys or questionnaires post-experience to gather structured feedback on specific aspects of the VR experience, such as usability, comfort, immersion, and content. In-App Feedback Tools: Implement in-app mechanisms for users to report bugs, request features, or share their experience directly within the VR environment, making it easy and immediate.

I've found it useful when commencing any form of testing to ask why we are testing or evaluating the experience and what we plan to do with the findings. Once this question is answered then you can make a more informed decision about what the best testing practice would be for this situation. Is this going to be published research? If so then proven and validated tools may be the best choice. Is there specific users or questions we want answered quickly to inform development? Perhaps more simple testing solutions would be preferable in this situation.

We need to conduct thorough QA testing across different devices, platforms, and environments to identify and address compatibility issues, performance bottlenecks, and usability concerns. The most important part is to collect feedback from beta testers or user groups to gather insights, iterate on improvements, and ensure the VR experience meets user expectations and quality standards.

When testing any VR headset, it's crucial to focus on key areas, starting with UI/UX. Prioritizing easy access to all interactive buttons or objects is a must for any app. Performance is also a top priority - ensuring the display output never dips below 30 FPS sets a solid benchmark. To catch any bugs, it's wise to start screen recording upon application launch, preferably connecting the headset to a PC for optimal performance during recording. Recording within the headset itself can lead to FPS drops due to processing constraints. Another critical aspect is user feedback. The app should clearly define its objectives to the user in a way that even a young child can understand.

Severe Headaches after too frequent usage of headsets is something you should take under consideration - that’s what I’ve experienced

Best practices in VR testing emphasize a balance between technical rigor and user-centric design. For instance, while developing a VR sports simulator, we employed a mix of automated testing for performance benchmarks and user testing sessions to gauge emotional engagement, illustrating that effective VR testing strategies must account for both the technical and experiential aspects of the product.

I'm surprised this isn't the first thing on the list, but in testing VR experiences, the first and foremost thing to keep present in your mind (in my opinion) is the objective or goal that you set out to achieve in the first place. Is this VR experience for entertainment? If so, what do we want our users to feel or experience? If it's for training or education: What are the learning outcomes we want the students to achieve as they complete the experience? By keeping those initial goals, objectives, purposes in focus, you can create a more clear and helpful testing protocol.

1) how does it make me feel ? ( not just the motion sickness but overall - was the story / experience worth the friction ?) 2) is it new ? ( does it replicate something I already tested , or is bringing something that I never experienced before ) 3) how was it built ? ( what are the great takeaways and workarounds from this specific experience - independently of the fun - that are adding value … and that I should probably reuse at some point ??)

VR motion sickness can cause your users to quit and never come back . It’s important to dive deep into what causes motion sickness to your users and tune those dials to allow for the user type you host. Iowa state University has proven that women are twice as likely to experience “cyber sickness” than men. Consider this in your VR product and usability design . Do you really want to loose half the potential audience with designs that trigger motion sickness?

I see a hole category about stakeholder approvals, from IT security to senior management. Simply buying and installing any such technology isn't doable in a large company without prior strategy work.

Humanity & human-centric design should remain at the core of the design & development compass. In transitioning to 3D we're given a wide open realm of possibilities freed from traditional constraints- this makes it extremely easy to overcomplicate various tasks, UI systems & experiences that could be simplified in satisfying, intuitive human ways. Navigation & UI doesn't always have to be complicated, sometimes going minimal provides the best results. Knowing when to emphasize & when to minimize is a hard balance to find, but extremely powerful once calibrated in context to the end user.