Design for Presence in VR, Part 1: Introduction
Make sure you check out Part 2 and updated version of the model for more detail!
I strongly believe that presence is the quality that makes Virtual Reality unique as a medium. Yet, analytical approaches to presence from a creative standpoint have been lacking. Let’s fix that.
Different presences = different experiences
Pioneering presence researchers, such as Mel Slater, are interested in the fidelity of experiences in virtual environments, and which technical components affect the degree of presence experiences. That’s where their interest ends — fair enough.
I argue here for a complimentary design point of view to presence, or rather, presences. My approach focuses on breaking down different types of presence by mapping existing designs to a set of general principles and experimenting with new designs informed by that mapping.
This approach is holistic — i.e. it does away with a narrow notion of presence dependent on perception and cognitive aspects alone — and tries to capture a more varied take on VR user experiences. It extends from high-level motivations, such as seeking social interaction in VR, to low-level design decisions that support such motivations, e.g. modelling facial expressions of characters for an increased sense of social presence.
Ultimately, I am aiming to provide tools to think about designing for VR in a more structured and inquisitive way. I’m also carrying the flag for multiple types of presence rather than the ‘one’ presence (with referent in the real world), which the more technical presence research seems to be preoccupied with.
In spirit, the model is related to thinking around game design patterns and especially frameworks such as the MDA (Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics) model for game design and research, and how it articulates types of fun to design for. In a similar fashion, I call for designers to think about various types of presence in order to explore the potential of VR.
An important aspect of this initiative is to understand that the design space of VR is only emerging, and the model I introduce here is meant to inspire thinking also around the ‘gaps’ of the model. The gaps, which also exist in the visualisation of the model, represent the uncharted territory of VR design, and consequently user experiences that are fundamentally characterized by their particular sense of presence. This is from where the experiences most native to VR are likely to emerge.
Let’s collaborate around VR Design Research!
In order to come up with a design model for any specific realm of creative practice, one needs to study a sample of existing designs and synthesize generalities from that sample. As part of my other workaround VR, such as analysis of software trends, I have analysed tens of VR titles, mostly games but also so-called experiences and expeditions. In the context of so-called design research, this activity constitutes ‘research into designs’ that hopes to gather insights, which can then be taken into new designs.
The ongoing analysis of new VR titles constitutes the basis for my model, and the model will keep on evolving through iteration as innovative design solutions emerge in new VR applications. Even if I do not expect to be able to cover each and every one VR title released, one can see that mapping VR design space is a complex task. Therefore I hope the model inspires like-minded designers to collaborate with me in charting the territory of VR design! (Drop me a line in case you are interested!)
Presence(s) as a design driver
A body of research exists on measuring degrees of presence in virtual environments, such as how real or plausible the experience feels in comparison to the real world. Yet, from a creative standpoint, VR presents a medium with which designers can craft user experiences of specific flavour to suit their expressive purposes, whether serving utilitarian, expressive, or entertainment ends.
Putting presence into the heart of creative design practices constitutes a design premise that stems from the essential characteristics of the medium and the technology it leverages. In practice, designers can frame their design goals with specific types of presence. Consequently, they can aim to design for a specific dimension of presence through employing particular design solutions, or ‘patterns’, that are expected to contribute to the emergence of a specific dimension of presence as part of the user experience.
In order to do this, designers need to, first, identify presence categories, and second, think about what specific design decisions and details contribute to various presence categories.
If we were to have a model that maps the ‘presence space’ of Virtual Reality, it would function as a tool that supports analytical thinking; it would help in establishing deliberate design drivers for presence ‘X’ instead of ‘Y’. This is what my model aims for.
It is important to understand that such drivers constitute design hypotheses rather than empirical proof to reach the desired experience of presence. It is possible to follow up and seek to validate such hypotheses via methods of user research, even if it has been shown that e.g. presence questionnaires are problematic. However, in this context, the interest for knowledge would not be the degree of presence in relation to its fidelity, but probing whether or not users agree, in their self-evaluation, that their subjective experience of presence aligns with the type of presence the designers have aimed for. This would be a key focus of inquiry in VR user and/or playtesting.
Coming up next, diving deep into the model’s current iteration: Designing for Presence in VR, Part 2: An Applied Model — stay tuned!
If you enjoyed this article, please share it and follow Game Futures at Twitter, Facebook, and here at Medium. Thanks!
