  Locomotion is one of the most essential interaction tasks in virtual reality
(VR) with teleportation being widely accepted as the state-of-the-art
locomotion technique at the time of this writing. A major draw-back of
teleportation is the accompanying physical rotation that is necessary to adjust
the users' orientation either before or after teleportation. This is a limiting
factor for tethered head-mounted displays (HMDs) and static body postures and
can induce additional simulator sickness for HMDs with three degrees-of-freedom
(DOF) due to missing parallax cues. To avoid physical rotation, previous work
proposed discrete rotation at fixed intervals (InPlace) as a controller-based
technique with low simulator sickness, yet the impact of varying intervals on
spatial disorientation, user presence and performance remains to be explored.
An unevaluated technique found in commercial VR games is reorientation during
the teleportation process (TeleTurn), which prevents physical rotation but
potentially increases interaction time due to its continuous orientation
selection. In an exploratory user study, where participants were free to apply
both techniques, we evaluated the impact of rotation parameters of either
technique on user performance and preference. Our results indicate that
discrete InPlace rotation introduced no significant spatial disorientation,
while user presence scores were increased. Discrete TeleTurn and teleportation
without rotation was ranked higher and achieved a higher presence score than
continuous TeleTurn, which is the current state-of-the-art found in VR games.
Based on observations, that participants avoided TeleTurn rotation when
discrete InPlace rotation was available, we distilled guidelines for designing
teleportation without physical rotation.
