VR系列——Oculus最佳实践：八、用户界面

• 平视显示器（HUD）
  
  • 上述的HUD和集成信息融入环境将是理想的。
  • 在目标上直接描绘十字，比一个固定的深度平面更佳。
  • 特写武器和工具可能会导致视疲劳；当不使用他们时，可让他们成为视野外替身的一部分。
• 替身有他们的优点和缺点；他们可以让用户置身在虚拟环境中，但当你在现实世界中的身体运动与虚拟的有差异时，会感觉到异常。

平视显示器（HUD）

一般说来，Oculus不鼓励使用传统的HUD。相反，我们鼓励开发者嵌入信息到环境本身。虽然，在立体视觉要求下重新设计，使得有些旧的约定可以起作用（参见：下面十字线的例子），但是简单的从一个非VR的游戏移植VR的内容到HUD上会引进新的问题，使得传统方法不切实际，甚至于令人不适。

首先，HUD将（出现在前面的）任何事物都封闭在3D的场景中。这在非立体游戏中不是问题，因为用户可以容易地假定HUD实际上是在其他事物的前方。不幸的是，增加双眼视觉差异（图像投射到每个眼睛的细微差别）作为一个深度线索，如果一个场景元素比起HUD的深度平面更接近用户，会造成矛盾：基于闭合，HUD被感知比场景元素更近，因为它覆盖了它后面所有的事物，然而双眼视觉差异表明，HUD比它所闭合的场景元素更远。当用户试图融合HUD和外界中的图像时，可能引起困难及（或）不适。

虽然使HUD与用户更近会避免阻塞和差距上的视觉矛盾，但是为了避免问题，必要条件是使界面比建议的最小舒适距离75cm还要近。设置玩家在HUD的深度剪裁边界同样引入了问题，因为用户会觉得人为地远离环境中的对象。尽管他们可能在特定的背景中工作，可以规避这些问题，但是HUD将很快被认为像VR中一个笨重的遗弃物，常常应被废弃，转而采用更加人性化的选择。

图2：Rift内部忙碌的HUD

相反，考虑构建信息化设备进入到环境本身。请记住，用户可以以自然和直观的方式移动头部来收集信息，这在传统的视频游戏中是不起作用的。例如，相较于HUD中的迷你地图和指南针，玩家可能会通过他们替身的手或驾驶舱在实际的地图和指南针中向下倾斜来获得他们的方位。这并不是说现实主义是必要的；敌人的健康指标会神奇地漂浮在他们头的上方。最重要的是以一种清晰、舒适的方式展示信息，当用户想要获得的一个清晰，单一的环境影像或信息时，不妨碍用户的感知能力。

瞄准十字线是适应旧范例到VR的一个卓越的例证。然而一个十字线对精确的瞄准是决定性的，简单地粘贴在一个固定的深度平面场景上将不会产出用户在游戏中期待的十字线行为。如果十字线出现在深度平面上的与眼睛聚焦到的不同，它会被认为是两个图形。为了使定位十字线以在传统视频游戏中相同的方式工作，它必须直接绘制在屏幕中作为目标的对象上，推测当用户瞄准时眼睛会聚焦在的地方。十字线本身可以根据距离确定更大或更小的尺寸，或者你可以用编程维持绝对的大小展示给用户；这对设计师而言，很大程度上是一种审美的决策。这表明，一些旧范例可以移植到VR，但并非为了新媒介的需求就不需要仔细的修饰和设计。

替身

在虚拟世界中，替身是一个用户主体的可视表示形式，通常与用户的位置、移动和姿态一致。用户可以看到自己的虚拟身体，并观察其他用户如何看到他们并与他们进行互动。由于VR往往是第一人称的体验，许多VR应用对用户都没有任何形体展示，因此用户在虚拟空间中是无形的。

图3：用户替身（屏幕底部）

替身可以有它的优点和缺点。一方面，替身可以让用户在虚拟世界中，对他们身体的比例和体积有较强的感觉。另一方面，呈现出逼真的替身身体时，与用户的本体感受矛盾（例如，替身正在走路而用户是坐着的），而让用户觉得怪异。用Rift在公共区域演示，对于能够看到自己的虚拟身体，用户普遍反应积极，至少可以作为引发审美响应的手段。像其他初期的媒介一样，用户的测试和评估对看看有什么最适合你的体验是必要的。

注：由于到目前为止我们只能弯曲我们的脖子，所有替身的身体只出现在图像边缘（图4）。任何武器或工具应与替身结合在一起，因此，用户看到替身实际持有它们。使用输入设备进行人体运动跟踪的开发者，应当跟踪用户的手或身体的其他部分，并更新替身以尽可能地减少匹配延迟。

武器和工具

在第一人称的射击游戏中，武器通常出现在屏幕的底部，放置位置仿佛用户正在持有和瞄准他们。在空间上，这意味着该武器在该场景中比任何东西都更接近。在一个典型的非立体游戏中，这不会产生任何特殊的问题，并且我们可以接受正在看一个大的、在一个正常距离内叠加在场景上的特写物体。

然而，当这被转变成一个立体的实现，事情会变得更加复杂。渲染的武器和工具如此靠近相机，要求用户在武器和场景内其他内容之间进行观察时，视野有很大的变化。同样，因为武器是如此接近观众，左右视野会变得明显不同，难以形成单一的三维视图。

我们觉得最舒服的方法是仅仅在一个无头的、全身替身的脖子上放置相机，如上文所述。武器和工具都作为替身的一部分呈现，可以在使用过程中举起他们，不使用时退出视野范围。

在玩家看来有一些可行的“障眼法”来渲染武器和工具，虽然我们不认同他们，但是你的内容可能需要或者适合于它们的某些变化。一种可能性是，如果你有2D的武器，可在你的HUD后渲染它。这需要兼顾一些收敛性和费用的融合问题，以使得武器看起来扁平化和人工化。

另一种可能的方法是采用多操纵，以使特写对象（例如：驾驶舱、头盔、枪）从主世界分开，并独立地使用环境中隔离的不同摄像机。这种方法有产生视觉缺陷的风险，诸如前景物体立体地展现在远与它们背景物体的地方，因此不建议使用这种方法。

你的内容区别于这里的任何内容，那么迭代试验和用户测试可能会为你的内容揭示最佳的解决方案。但是目前我们的建议是将武器和工具作为用户替身的一个组成部分来实现。

---

原文如下

• Heads-Up Display (HUD)
  
  • Foregoing the HUD and integrating information into the environment would be ideal.
  • Paint reticles directly onto targets rather than a fixed depth plane.
  • Close-up weapons and tools can lead to eyestrain; make them a part of the avatar that drops out of view when not in use.
• Avatars have their pros and cons; they can ground the user in the virtual environment, but also feel unusual when discrepant from what your real world body is doing.

Heads-Up Display (HUD)

In general, Oculus discourages the use of traditional HUDs. Instead, we encourage developers to embed that information into the environment itself. Although certain old conventions can work with thoughtful re-design that is mindful of the demands of stereoscopic vision (see: reticle example below), simply porting over the HUD from a non-VR game into VR content introduces new issues that make them impractical or even discomforting.

First, HUDs occlude (appear in front of) everything in the 3D scene. This isn’t a problem in non-stereoscopic games, because the user can easily assume that the HUD actually is in front of everything else. Unfortunately, adding binocular disparity (the slight differences between the images projected to each eye) as a depth cue can create a contradiction if a scene element comes closer to the user than the depth plane of the HUD: based on occlusion, the HUD is perceived as closer than the scene element because it covers everything behind it, yet binocular disparity indicates that the HUD is farther away than the scene element it occludes. This can lead to difficulty and/or discomfort when trying to fuse the images for either the HUD or the environment.

Although moving the HUD closer to the user might prevent visual contradictions of occlusion and disparity, the proximity necessary to prevent problems will most likely bring the interface closer than the recommended minimum comfortable distance, 75 cm. Setting the player’s clipping boundary at the depth of the HUD similarly introduces issues, as users will feel artificially distanced from objects in the environment. Although they might work within particular contexts that can circumvent these issues, HUDs can quickly feel like a clunky relic in VR and generally should be deprecated in favor of more user-friendly options.

Figure 2: Busy HUD from Inside a Rift

Instead, consider building informational devices into into the environment itself. Remember that users can move their heads to glean information in a natural and intuitive way that might not work in traditional video games. For instance, rather than a mini map and compass in a HUD, the player might get their bearings by glancing down at an actual map and compass in their avatar’s hands or cockpit. This is not to say realism is necessary; enemy health gauges might float magically over their heads. What’s important is presenting information in a clear and comfortable way that does not interfere with the player’s ability to perceive a clear, single image of the environment or the information they are trying to gather.

Targeting reticles are an excellent illustration of adapting old paradigms to VR. While a reticle is critical for accurate aiming, simply pasting it over the scene at a fixed depth plane will not yield the reticle behavior players expect in a game. If the reticle appears at a depth plane different from where the eyes are converged, it is perceived as a double image. In order for the targeting reticle to work the same way it does in traditional video games, it must be drawn directly onto the object it is targeting on screen, presumably where the user’s eyes are converged when aiming. The reticle itself can be a fixed size that appears bigger or smaller with distance, or you can program it to maintain an absolute size to the user; this is largely an aesthetic decision for the designer. This simply goes to show that some old paradigms can be ported over to VR, but not without careful modification and design for the demands of the new medium.

Avatars

An avatar is a visible representation of a user’s body in a virtual world that typically corresponds to the user’s position, movement and gestures. The user can see their own virtual body and observe how other users see and interact with them. Since VR is often a first person experience, many VR applications dispense with any representation of the user whatsoever, and therefore the user is simply disembodied in virtual space.

Figure 3: User Avatar (Bottom of Screen)

An avatar can have its pros and cons. On the one hand, an avatar can give the user a strong sense of scale and of their body’s volume in the virtual world. On the other hand, presenting a realistic avatar body that contradicts the user’s proprioception (e.g., a walking body while they are seated) can feel peculiar. At public demonstrations with the Rift, users generally react positively to being able to see their virtual bodies, and so can at least serve as a means of eliciting an aesthetic response. Like anything else in this young medium, user testing and evaluation are necessary to see what works best for your experience.

Note: Since we can only bend our neck so far, the avatar’s body only appears at the very edge of the image (figure 4). Any weapons or tools should be integrated with the avatar, so the user sees the avatar actually holding them. Developers that use input devices for body tracking should track the user’s hands or other body parts and update the avatar to match with as little latency as possible.

Weapons and Tools

In first person shooters, weapons typically appear towards the bottom of the screen, positioned as though the user is holding and aiming them. Spatially, this means that the weapon is much closer than anything else in the scene. In a typical non-stereoscopic game, this doesn’t create any special problems, and we accept that we are seeing a big, close-up object superimposed over a scene at a normal distance.

However, when this is translated into a stereoscopic implementation, things get a little more complicated. Rendering weapons and tools so close to the camera requires the user to make large changes in eye convergence when looking between the weapon to the rest of the scene. Also, because the weapon is so close to the viewer, the left and right views can be significantly different and difficult to resolve into a single threedimensional view.

The approach we find most comfortable is to position the cameras just above the neck of a headless, full-body avatar, as described above. Weapons and tools are rendered as part of the user avatar, which can hold them up during use, but otherwise drop them out of view.

There are some possible “cheats” to rendering weapons and tools in the player’s view, and although we do not endorse them, your content might require or be suited to some variation on them. One possibility is to render weapons in 2D, behind your HUD if you have one. This takes care of some of the convergence and fusion problems at the expense of making the weapon look flat and artificial.

Another possible approach is to employ multi-rigging, so that close-up objects (e.g., cockpit, helmet, gun) are separate from the main world and independently employ a different camera separation from the environment. This method runs the risk of creating visual flaws, such as foreground objects appearing stereoscopically further away than the background behind them, and are discouraged.

Iterative experimentation and user testing might reveal an optimal solution for your content that differs from anything here, but our current recommendation is to implement weapons and tools as a component of the user’s avatar.