Spatial.io is a collection of Metaverse spaces for creating virtual galleries and events in beautiful art-built styles. It is also an online community where you can visit thousands of spaces created by other members. Prior knowledge of 3D content creation is not required to get started creating in Spatial.io. Sign up with Metamask or a Google account with just a few clicks.
Use a template of typical virtual spaces, like a meeting room, gallery, or camping place, where you can set up your collections with a few clicks. You can then import 3D models, images, videos, sounds, and web pages from local and online sources. Sharing your gallery by spreading the individual link of the space, and your community and collectors can discover and participate via mobile, web clients or VR headsets. You can even let people purchase NFTs.
You can also host social events live in your gallery that include up to 50 people. While using custom avatars, your guests may discuss your NFT collection and build a sense of community.
The primary goal of this test is to explore collaboration and discussion capabilities.
Before the test:
For the test:
Acoustic stimuli to identify who is talking.
Users experienced the highest level of control and agency in their virtual experience. A good level of engagement and responsiveness to interaction is observed, but a slightly lower level of flow (lost the track of time) and control (move or manipulate objects) indicators. The characteristics of the title, in which the user does not log in or follow a guided tour, but rather must test and use functions, may have influenced an experience of decreased control.
The realism of the experience is perceived as the second high by the evaluators, who report rather reduced naturality and consistency of the experience. This could also be explained by the characteristics of the title, where the absence of a narrative that guides the experience and a long loading time of virtual objects to spawn them could be generating greater awareness of the artificiality of the experience and “results in a break” in presence.
As can be observed, both the visual and auditory aspects of the title were evaluated from fair to good, which is consistent with its focus on art and design experience. One indicator, the involvement of sound effects, is evaluated as relatively ineffective, having a potential for improvement.
The results show that the devices contribute to keeping the user focused on the visual aspect and the tasks, with the stand-alone models (Oculus Quest 1 and 2) performing slightly better. The lowest indicator is related to the controls, which makes a lot of sense with the characteristics of the experience, in which a tethered headset might limit the free movements of evaluators when they were focused on designing or editing objects, so there is a constant awareness towards them.
To summarize, on a scale of 1 to 7, the sense of presence when using Spatial.io is rated a 5.27, which can be considered fair to high. The strengths of the experience with this title are the sense of agency and the realism of the environment, which is largely related to users’ control over the VE, as well as the consistency of information from different sensors, then consequently, a clear sense of orientation. On the contrary, its weakest aspect is the control over distractions from the outside physical world. The former can be explained by the mechanics of the interactions within the experience, especially the 2D UIs, which are unnatural and not related to a story or narrative to guide them; the latter can be related to a low relevance of the sound/auditory aspect given to the experience.
It can be observed that no linkage or appropriation of the virtual body is achieved. The evaluators assign a value between -2 and -1.5 (disagree) to most of the indicators related to embodiment within the virtual body. This can be explained by the fact that even Spatial.io provides real avatars of users’ upper bodies generated via their photos, so they felt “as if the virtual body was my body” to some extent. This application nevertheless uses third-person view and plain T-shirt outfits, so the control and appearance of avatars did not trigger the experience of embodiment well enough. Hence, these results should not be unexpected.
This title is a virtual gallery and creativity software, so there isn’t a single significant stimulus that is relevant to this analysis. Again, the results show that embodiment within a virtual body was not achieved. The indicators are closely related to the sense of touch, and all of them were evaluated negatively, which may be related to the missing haptic feedback when interacting with the virtual objects.
To summarize, the sense of embodiment was not achieved when using Spatial.io. The main factor that could explain this is lacking the feeling of ownership of the virtual body or avatar for the user, and a greater focus on the communication and meeting options of the tool rather than on the embodied or sensory experience of the user.
The narrative in Spatial.io is supported by the following story elements, Visual elements, Auditory elements, Avatar, Mise en scène, and Real-world metaphors. The main distraction is “the loading times for virtual objects that were spawned into the environment was often long and resulted in a break in presence.”
To summarize, the emotions triggered by this immersive experience are mostly calm, peaceful, and secure. The set design and lighting are the most influential visual effects. The visual design supports this emotion, including the narrative shows a space for “work” collaboration mimicking a modern office, the minimalism style, avatar, and well-lit lighting and color changing based on the environment, as well as a series of architectural elements and spaces supporting different mood, activities, interactions, and scenarios.
Enhancement of Presence / Narrative
“The spaces designed for “work” collaboration mimic the interiors you might see in a modern office. They are familiar environments, bright, tidy, with big windows (as opposed to dark theatrical venue or bar).”
“Presence is enhanced due to visually consistent environments, using a combination of lighting, color, texture and layout to create believable standalone spaces.”
Emotional Response
“Calm, clean environment to do work.”
“Calm, secure.”
“The minimal environments are both peaceful and somewhat isolated.”
Mood Support
“Clapping creates confetti.”
“When emoting via the avatar…”
Lighting
“Environment is well lit.”
“Lighting varies based on the environment. It is often simple yet effective at supporting the unique moods of different spaces.”
Color
“Color also varies based on the different environments, supporting the unique moods of each space.”
Set Design and Layouts
“Architectural elements set the feel of a business environment.”
“There are a series of different spaces that will support the different mood or activity e.g., boardroom vs a room with a table. The spaces are designed to contain a group of people and facilitate activity around a board.”
“Environments are bespoke and designed for different interactions and scenarios. This ranges from architectural environments for curating and displaying artworks, to collaborative working environments for activities like brainstorming.”
To summarize, the audio design didn’t trigger any specific emotion because Spatial.io focuses on visual communication. The most significant sound effect is used for mood support, in which the dominant sounds are people’s dialogue and corresponding auditory cues, such as voices getting louder as you get nearer to others. The soundscape was very minimal and quiet, and included sounds such as fire cracking, crickets chirping, and water running, all of which were perceived as somewhat unnatural.
Enhancement of Presence / Narrative
“The audio seemed very minimal and quiet, which was a bitunnatural.”
Audio Phenomena
“Some ambient sounds could be heard, such as a firecrackling or water running.”
Attention Cues
“The sound of other collaborators' voices grows louder asyou get nearer to them.”
Mood Support
“In the camping space, you can hear the fire crackling andcricket’s chirp.”
“Sound of speaking to one another and any audio shared e.g. via the browser.”
Physiological and affective responses refer to the autonomic responses and subjective perceptions related to the use of the app. There was no physiological response.
None
Three evaluators reported their affective responses as calming/relaxed or, or neutral inside Spatial.io.
“It was fun to collaborate with colleagues on learning Spatial and our design challenge, also the selfie cam stick.”
“The space is a neutral backdrop, intentionally, to enable activities such as presentations or brainstorming.”
“The combination of the minimal environments and the lack of other players in many environments made the experience quite serene.”
Selection method refers to readying a virtual object for interaction without yet committing to taking that action. It is carried out by the input device controls and multiple selection options are not offered.
Using the control devices, a number of actions can be carried out utilizing the grip button, direct touch, grip gesture, tracked hands, and buttons that surface menu.
It is possible to modify the position, rotation, scale, and properties of selected objects by direct manipulation using the input device or tracked hands, using both mono- or synchronous bimanual interactions.
Sound effects, haptic pulses and shaders are used as means of informing the user about system actions.
The system doesn’t indicate unavailable options.
An overall qualitative synthesis suggests that the user experience of Spatial is in line with its goal of facilitating productivity and collaboration. With a narrative focused on collaboration and productivity, and with a large number of interaction possibilities, the low levels of embodiment and affective response would not be an obstacle to adequate immersion with a productive rather than recreational focus (as in VR chat, for example), resulting in an experience consistent with the intended design.
