Mapping XR Platforms
Analyzing Immersion from the Designer’s Perspective
Meng Li (Xi’an Jiaotong University, TU Delft - Human Factors)
L.D. Houwing (TU Delft - Teaching & Learning Services)
Armagan Albayrak (TU Delft - Human Factors)
Mohammad Shidujaman (Independent University)
DJ van Eijk (TU Delft - Human Factors)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Understanding humans are the key to developing optimal design solutions for product-service systems. In this sense, the experiential approach is in line but might go beyond typical Human Centered Design (HCD) methods in that it focuses on generating positive experiences that contribute directly to human well-being. Extended Reality (XR) showed the potential to replicate or simulate experience as a whole and gained attention from design communities. XR platforms confused design practitioners due to their fast-advancing amounts and relevant experiences. Hence, this study introduced two surveys on XR platforms to clarify which experiences they could provide and when to implement them into HCD processes. Survey 1 categorized XR platforms according to their key attributes and mapped them into the Experience Matrix. Survey 2 invented two designer personas and a fictional project to analyze barriers and strategies to implement XR platforms into design processes. Eighty-eight XR platforms were categorized into nineteen clusters, where creation and simulation had the highest numbers. Regarding implementing XR in design practices, the cost is still the key concern and there's a trade-off between software cost and assets purchased for different types of designers.