  The amount of interest in Virtual Reality (VR) research has significantly
increased over the past few years, both in academia and industry. The release
of commercial VR Head-Mounted Displays (HMDs) has been a major contributing
factor. However, there is still much to be learned, especially how views and
input techniques, as well as their interaction, affect the VR experience. There
is little work done on First-Person Shooter (FPS) games in VR, and those few
studies have focused on a single aspect of VR FPS. They either focused on the
view, e.g., comparing VR to a typical 2D display or on the controller types. To
the best of our knowledge, there are no studies investigating variations of
2D/3D views in HMDs, controller types, and their interactions. As such, it is
challenging to distinguish findings related to the controller type from those
related to the view. If a study does not control for the input method and finds
that 2D displays lead to higher performance than VR, we cannot generalize the
results because of the confounding variables. To understand their interaction,
we propose to analyze in more depth, whether it is the view (2D vs. 3D) or the
way it is controlled that gives the platforms their respective advantages. To
study the effects of the 2D/3D views, we created a 2D visual technique,
PlaneFrame, that was applied inside the VR headset. Our results show that the
controller type can have a significant positive impact on performance,
immersion, and simulator sickness when associated with a 2D view. They further
our understanding of the interactions that controllers and views have and
demonstrate that comparisons are highly dependent on how both factors go
together. Further, through a series of three experiments, we developed a
technique that can lead to a substantial performance, a good level of
immersion, and can minimize the level of simulator sickness.
