Skip to main content
Up and Coming
August 1, 2014

Walking in VR [Long, Long, Long Post]

I keep finding myself posting really long posts in random threads that start talking about locomotion in VR, so I'm going to make a big post here instead that I can just point to.

Introduction
There are lots of problems to be solved in VR. Perhaps the single most critical problem right now is the question of Input. For the purposes of this thread, I'm going to take it as a given that we need the ability to reserve our hands for doing hand-related things, and not for moving around. That is to say, we're going to need to use our feet or legs to operate the device that will allow us to move around in VR. I've been calling these locomotion devices 'Walkers'.
I should point out that I'm writing this thing for anyone to read. I realise that most of the people here will know what optical-tracking occlusion is, or well-understand the downsides to the Virtuix Omni, but I'm putting it all here just to be thorough.

The Current State of VR Walkers
Most people on this forum will be well-versed on the current state of VR input, but just in case anyone missed a device or two, I'm going to put here a list of all VR Walkers that I'm currently aware of. If I miss any, let me know and I'll add it asap.
In no particular order:
  • The Virtuix Omni
    The first of the harness-style omnidirectional treadmills. A curved, low-friction surface, special shoes, and a weight-removing harness allow the user to convert the natural walking and running motions they use everyday into virtual movement commands.

  • The Cyberith Virtualizer
    Following the Omni's example, the Virtualizer works similarly to the Omni, but allows the user to crouch and jump while remaining in the harness, allows the user to play in socks rather than special shoes, and has a flat surface rather than the Omni's curved one.

  • The Walkmouse
    A large-circular panel inset with many small rollers, this treadmill simulates a moving surface over which the user can walk.

  • The StinkyBoard
    Effectively a four-button gamepad for a single foot, this device allows the user to emulate WASD keyboard events using the feet, and so achieve simple VR locomotion

  • The Wii BalanceBoard
    Not actually a PC peripheral, with some hacking can be used as a lean-controller, allowing the user to move in VR by leaning their body forward, backwards, left and right

  • Stompz
    Implements IMUs on each feet to allow the user to make 'stomping' gestures to move forward, left and right in game

  • Infinideck
    A more traditional-style treadmill that can move in any 2D direction, that the user walks on as they would walk on a normal surface. Unfortunately, must be manually controller by a second person at the time of this writing

  • WizDish
    A low-friction surface that removes the vertical foot-motion component of walking, leaving the user to make skii-ing like gestures to control motion. At the time of this writing, lacks community support and/or funding

  • Free-Walking
    Perhaps the most immersive of them all - the user walks around a physically-large space (like a football field or warehouse), with real walked distance corresponding 1:1 to virtual walked distance

  • LocoVR
    A crowd-sourced project involving what is described as its conceiver as "basically a cross between a small bar stool and a kind of oversized joystick", able to rotate freely and respond to lean from the user to provide locomotion input

  • Pointman
    In use by the US Navy for infantry simulation, the Pointman system is actually a combination of several input devices. One of them is a device comprised of two footpedals able to move forward and backwards, as well as to be pressed down like a car acceleration pedal. At the time of this writing, a handheld controller is required for turning.


Adoption Factors
A critical thing with input devices is the degree of adoption. We obviously want a device that will be used by as many people as possible - this will give developers confidence that they aren't wasting their time by building games that support this hypothetical device, and with more content for the device, adoption will increase further, until the device is largely ubiquitous.
  • Price
    This one is a bit of a no-brainer. The cheaper something is, the more people will buy it. I would say that once the price of a device goes above about $150, it becomes a serious barrier to widespread adoption. Not that the ideal VR walker should necessarily be cheaper than this, but it's a good ballpark figure to go for.

  • Size
    Most people live in cities, meaning most people have very limited living space. That is to say, people tend to be less than impressed if asked to reserve an area the size of a double-bed for a VR input device. So the physical size of the device will be a further barrier to widespread adoption. Ideally, the system will fit onto the user, so it effectively takes up no space in and of itself.

  • Flexibility
    Keep in mind that locomotion in games isn't always human-style walking/running. For example, think of Minecraft with a Virtuix Omni. The Omni would work great while you're running around mining, building and fighting zombies. But if you want to play in creative-mode, suddenly you have this big mismatch between flying around in-game, but making walking and running motions in reality to drive this motion. For a device to become widely-used, it needs to be suited to a wide variety of locomotion applications, not just walking and running


Immersion Factors
So, casting aside questions of what will get the device used, and turning our attention instead to what will make the device great, we need to think about what factors actually influence how suited the device is for VR. That is to say, how immersive is the device to use?
  • Movement similarity
    We all know what walking feels like. We know what the movements are, and how it feels when we perform them. The closer a VR Walker can get to emulating this motion, the more immersive it will be. In this way, devices like the Omni or the Virtualizer are a step-up from solutions like the StinkyBoard or Stompz. The obvious ideal is devices like the WalkMouse or InfiniDeck, the question of whether these solutions are currently realistic remains to be seen.

  • Constraints on movement
    An important thing to consider is the degree to which a VR Walker inhibits our ability to perform actions unrelated to locomotion. For example, the Omni doesn't allow users to bend down, because they're stuck in a harness that has a fixed height off the ground. Both the Omni and the Virtualizer don't allow the user to lower their hands below their waist, since the harness gets in the way. These kinds of movement constraints are non-issues in some games, especially FPS, where the user always has their hands above their waist holding a gun, but significantly annoying in games involving peaceful exploration, where the user is likely to want their hands to rest in their natural position - down by their sides.

  • Strenuousness (Spellcheck agrees with me that this is a real word)
    When we're talking about using natural motion to run around in games, obviously an issue is going to be people getting tired! I personally can't run for much more than 5 minutes before I'm completely wasted. I'm definitely not up to running around for a half-hour gaming session. This isn't only about physical capability - if people are getting tired and cramped while playing, this is an immersion-breaking experience and something to be avoided.


Friction
So that's the groundwork laid out. But the real question is 'what are the constraints under which the creator of a VR Walker must operate?'. The central constraint (if we want to use natural walking/running motion) is friction. More specifically, it's the normal component of friction.
When we walk, we are effectively applying pressure down onto the ground with our weight, and then using friction to use that weight to move us forward. If we want the users to be making the same motions in VR that they make in material reality (MR?), then we need some way of negating this forward motion. There are basically two ways of doing this:
  • Move the ground under the user
    This is the solution that WalkMouse and InfiniDeck are pursuing. This is also the solution that traditional exercise treadmills implement. All you have to do is have a device that the user stands on, and when they move, detect the speed of movement, and move the surface they're standing on in the opposite direction at that speed, negating any physical movement the user might undergo, saving them from crashing into a wall and breaking their precious precious DK2.

  • Remove the frictional force
    This is the solution that the Omni and the Virtualizer are using, and many hypothetical input devices involving suspending the user from harnesses on the ceiling etc. are also operating under this principle.
    This solution typically involves both reducing the normal force (that is, taking the user's weight off the feet so that the feet are effectively suspended), and reducing the coefficient of friction between the feet and the ground (eg. socks on a polished wood floor) so that the feet can easily slide over the surface.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both of these methods. For the following reasons, I'm going to be considering only the second option:
  • Moving the ground under the user requires many moving parts, increasing cost and reducing reliability

  • Ensuring that the dynamic surface behaves exactly as the user would expect a static surface to behave is 100% essential to avoid loss of balance leading to injury, and requires zero latency, which is an engineering challenge not likely to be solved any time soon


So the question now becomes 'how do we take the weight off the feet to allow natural input, without implementing a large mechanism to support a harness that limits the user's natural movement'?
Quite the brain teaser.

Sensors
The last thing I'll talk about is sensors, and which sensors are most applicable to the creation of a VR walker, and some considerations for using each one. I'm not really a Maker, so I'm just going to give an outline of a few that I've thought about
  • IMUs (Inertial Measurement Units)
    Specifically, I'm talking about IMUs containing an accelerometer, a gyroscope and a magnetometer. Through sensor-fusion these three devices allow us to get drift-free rotational measurements at about 1kHz. In addition, with the advent of MEMS technology, they're pretty cheap, and digital MEMS IMUs do much of the processing on the chip, so they're easy to use.

  • Optical tracking
    Optical tracking is awesome because it gives us 1:1 positional data in realtime, and this data will never drift. The main Achilles' Heel of optical tracking is occlusion - any objects between the camera and the tracked objects will interfere with tracking.

  • Pressure sensors
    These devices measure pressure applied downwards on them. Four of these are all the sensors that the Wii BalanceBoard has behind it. They're quite versatile, and can be small enough to be used in wearable devices.

  • Capacitative sensors
    These are effectively touch-sensors, that when placed in an array, allow the position and shape of an object in contact with the sensor surface to be resolved. These are the sensors behind the Omni.


The Challenge
So I hope I've summed up the state of VR Locomotion Input decently. I think what it boils down to is the following challenge:
    What device removes the weight of the user off the ground so that they can use their normal walking/running motions, but doesn't impose any other movement restrictions? Does this device take up little room, and is it cheaper than $200? Can it be used to move around in experiences that don't necessarily involve walking/running? Can it be used for multiple hours at a time without the user getting tired or sore?

I don't think it's going to be an easy nut to crack, and I don't think any of the current solutions that are either on the market, or will be coming to market in the foreseeable future are adequate.

What do you guys think - I reckon as a community we can come up with some pretty sweet ideas that will hopefully be picked up by someone with the know-how and capital to make this ideal VR-walker a reality. I think it's the one thing that stands between us and totally immersive first-person walking VR experiences.
From what people are saying, Elite:Dangerous is mind-blowing because we finally have an experience where we can match input devices to virtual reality perfectly. Once we can do that with common non-cockpit experiences, VR will have taken a huge step forward.

    89 replies

    New Participant
    May 15, 2015
    just an idea, what about something like a boot in a hydraulic frame al a pacific rim jaeger controls, it only provides resistance one way so when you lift the boot, you don't feel it? or could be run using pneumatics? you would be able to run in place without being harnessed into anything so long as you keep your balance? the framework would prob have to be smarter than say the omni or vertualiser

    Sorry, i'm not an engineer so there is a fuzzy pic in my head of a frame work on the floor up to about knee hight with a pair of boots suspended from several acuators to give 4 different axis of movement...
    Up and Coming
    May 15, 2015
    Very good last post mptp. I agree with most of it, however i think that you are a bit too quick to dismiss the 2nd level of abstraction (what you call alteration of center of gravity).

    "mptp" wrote:
    Here's a simplified spectrum (from most abstraction to least abstraction):

    • WASD / Joystick: A small movement of your finger translates to walking around

    • Balance Board / Dance Mat / Stinkyboard: An alteration of your center of gravity translates to walking around

    • Stompz / WizDish: Moving your feet in a vaguely walking-like-way translates to walking around

    • Omni / Virtualizer: Walking in place on a frictionless surface translates to walking around

    • Walking around a tracking volume i.e. HTC Vive: Walking around translates to walking around

    ....

    And fundamentally, VR input devices are about inducing presence. If you don't have presence, then you're just wasting energy. Which leads me to conclude that right now, the only two options for locomoting in VR are traditional FPS controls, or real-space-tracking-volumes.

    First of all i believe that in order to implement this 2nd level we don't really need a physical input device, you can obtain similar or better results just by tracking your torso, or what i like to call Torso-Based Navigation; more specifically you can track the position of the base of the neck (for translation) and the orientation of the torso/hips (for rotation).

    We can already do the first one fairly well using only the positional tracking of the HMD and applying the head-model "backwards". The second one is already possible as well but using accessories like the Hydra, Kinect or Perception Neuron; having said that i think it will become a standard fairly soon, mainly because we also need this in order to accurately represent avatars in VR.

    Secondly, you are right that we will probably not achieve the same level of presence by leaning than by physically walking 1:1, but i don't think presence is a binary thing, it's a gradual line that goes from immersion to full presence, and i think in this case immersion/presence is definitely a step above than using thumbsticks. Also with the right context this presence could be boosted by a fair margin (e.g. in the game you are using a hoverboard to move around).

    Also torso-based navigation is much more intuitive and precise than using thumbsticks, and you don't need to have the dexterity of a gamer to use it. On top of that it only requires one external button to activate (in its current implementation) so it pretty much frees your hands to do any other thing. Besides, it can be used either seated, standing in place or walking-around, and doesn't require full 360 rotations so there are no problems with cable management.

    Lastly, i am convinced that this method greatly alleviates sim-sickness compared to other methods like using traditional controllers. I think i have a decent "scientific" explanation of why it works (see link), and i've confirmed my "hypothesis" with several test subjects.


    For all these reasons i believe that many people will be willing to use a bit more energy than what it's needed for thumbsticks and that Torso-Based Navigation is going to be one of the most popular methods for navigating VR, albeit obviously not the only one.

    More details and demo here:
    https://forums.oculus.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=18422
    Participant
    May 26, 2015
    I've been thinking for a while that the only sustainable solution to gaming is are controllers and mouse and keyboard setups for the rather apparent reason that 'gamers are inherently lazy'. How well do these other controllers have in terms of endurance? is it any better that Wii and Xbox? does the immersion help with endurance?
    Up and Coming
    May 26, 2015
    "meyome" wrote:
    I've been thinking for a while that the only sustainable solution to gaming is are controllers and mouse and keyboard setups for the rather apparent reason that 'gamers are inherently lazy'. How well do these other controllers have in terms of endurance? is it any better that Wii and Xbox? does the immersion help with endurance?

    Try Killzone 3 on PS3 with PS Move and Sharpshooter and you will find out.
    Participant
    May 27, 2015
    Problem with most systems is that they rely on waist restraints which causes a person's upper body to tilt forward which means they need something to support themselves and have to walk unnaturally.

    The ideal spot to restrain someone is from the center of their back, right between the shoulder blades. Have you ever worn a backpack and someone grabs onto it, You can't walk forward but you don't feel as if your gonna fall over.

    Also the method of low friction platform works, sorta, if you can restrain the person (via the center of the back) without shaking or flexing. If there is low flex and support then you won't feel like the ground is sliding underneath you. You should be able to go limp and stay upright.

    A system I have been planning involves using a tight fitting jacket with low flex material banded along the horizontal around the rib cage and over the shoulders. This reduces flex.

    Your feet are held in place on two omni directional pegs that somewhat support your weight but also have adjustable hydraulic friction actuators. Very basic setup requiring only two ball joints.

    The movement feels natural but the pressure an weight of your body is on your upper body, only a fraction of your weight is put on your feet. Also additional supports are needed with the aid of a body harness that wraps under your crotch.

    Not Ideal but its the only method I can see feeling like freedom. Benefit is that your arms are completely free to move in all direction. Downside is turning has to be simulated in game via accurate measurements of the pivot of your ankles, Which at the moment doesn't exist.
    New Participant
    May 31, 2015
    Hi
    Our team,named KATVR, have developed a set of locomotion input device which may solve part of the problems of natural walking and with low constraint. Come check out our latest prototype June 8th at TechCrunch China! :D
    Participant
    June 20, 2015
    "coffee" wrote:
    Hi
    Our team,named KATVR, have developed a set of locomotion input device which may solve part of the problems of natural walking and with low constraint. Come check out our latest prototype June 8th at TechCrunch China! :D

    Great! I work on similar concept. But trying to eliminate the need in sliding platform and specialized shoes.
    Hows weight and pressure reflect on rib cage comfort of the user ?
    mptpAuthor
    Up and Coming
    July 3, 2015
    "coffee" wrote:
    Hi
    Our team,named KATVR, have developed a set of locomotion input device which may solve part of the problems of natural walking and with low constraint. Come check out our latest prototype June 8th at TechCrunch China! :D


    Hey there!
    I saw KATVR over on the subreddit - I'm glad you're here too! KATVR is, so far, the most compelling of the slippy-shoe ODTs for the sole reason that it doesn't restrict arm movement in the vast majority of situations. I'll be watching you guys closely, and hope to someday get a chance to try your prototype out if you should come down to Australia. :)
    Melbourne-based creative technologist. I flit between experimental AR/VR experiences, audiovisual electronics and full-stack web development. http://www.lachansleight.io
    July 3, 2015
    In my experience, following things help to prevent nausea during walking:

    1. Slow walking speed. This one makes the biggest impact. Cutting the walking speed by half can make the difference between unplayable vomit comet and relatively playable game.

    2. Do not use thumbsticks, use a button for walking. Thumbsticks do not always move you exactly forward, they move you in the direction of the thumbstick, and this direction changes a little no matter how much you try to move straight. This again induces nausea.

    3. Stand, dont sit when walking.
    Up and Coming
    July 6, 2015
    What's interesting about KatVR is that even though it doesn't have the constraints of the Omni with regards to crouching, it still decides against allowing the user to fully crouch. The Cyberith, however, goes ahead and lets the user fully crouch. What is everything missing that Cyberith isn't?

    My thoughts are that Cyberith is simply dangerous. If you slip and your foot goes sliding out from underneath you and smashes into one of those support poles, you could seriously break something.

    I agree with the above the KatVR is the best I've seen and superior to the Omni. If they can get costs down, they will definitely give Jan a run for his money.