VR UX Research · OPT Dev · Meta Horizon Worlds
A Horizon Worlds VR experience with a 13% completion rate. One month, one researcher, and an iterative playtesting process that turned a drop-off crisis into a 95% improvement — and a model for research-driven VR design.
Context
Made in Brooklyn Games · Meta Horizon Worlds · 1-month sprint
Role
Lead UX Researcher · 3D Modeler · Optimization Developer · World Tester
Methods
Stakeholder interviews · Player interviews (in-VR) · Iterative playtesting · Observational research
Outcome
95% decrease in drop-offs · 87% world completion · 90% rated experience memorable
Players were disengaging before completing the experience — with a world completion rate of just 13%. The team had built something technically solid, but couldn’t identify why users were dropping off.
Research needed to find the answer fast, with a one-month runway and no prior VR research playbook to draw from.
“...We have a solid idea here but we need re-engagement and most players don’t finish the experience.”
Client — Made in Brooklyn Games
With one month and a live platform, I needed research that moved at development speed. I chose an iterative approach: stakeholder alignment first to surface the team’s assumptions, then direct user research inside Horizon — interviewing players in social Hub Worlds rather than pulling them out of context.
I opted not to record sessions to earn faster trust and more candid responses in an unfamiliar environment. Ten interviews later, three clear patterns emerged — each one directly shaping the design decisions that followed.
Research Process
Define Problem
Clarify goals, users & research scope
Initial Test
Validate early assumptions & concepts
Prototype & Implement
Build, handoff & collaborate
Validation Test
Confirm solution works, iterate if needed
Ten player interviews inside Horizon social worlds surfaced the engagement patterns the team had been unable to see from inside the build. Three drivers consistently separated players who stayed from players who left.
95%
decrease in early drop-offs from initial playtesting to final validation
87%
of players reached the final area and indicated they would replay
90%
rated the experience memorable compared to most Horizon worlds
Theme 01
Replayability hinges on variety
Not just visual variety, but mechanical variety — different weapons, different atmospheres, a sense that the world rewards you for coming back.
“I like worlds that give you a job or a mission — they’re more fun.”
Theme 02
Mission clarity reduces drop-off
Players weren’t failing because the game was hard — they were disengaging because they didn’t know what to do next. Spatial and audio cues became the solution.
“This area looks cool but if you didn’t say anything I’d think this is it.”
Theme 03
Delight lives in unexpected interactivity
The moments players remembered most weren’t the big set pieces — they were the small, tactile, unexpected ones that made the world feel alive.
“I’ll never forget my first time using the jetpack — I like to bring people here because of that.”
Insight → Decision
Replayability requires mechanical variety
The design response wasn’t cosmetic. I introduced weapon variety, distinct level atmospheres, and a progression system — creating mechanical reasons to return, not just aesthetic ones.
Weapon Variety
Distinct mechanics per weapon type to reward experimentation and return visits
Distinct Atmospheres
Unique visual and tonal identity per level to create a sense of world progression
Progression System
Clear sense of advancement to keep players motivated to complete the experience
Insight → Decision
Clarity and delight require spatial design
Two distinct design problems, one shared solution space: the world itself needed to do more work. Spatial audio guided players forward; unexpected object interactions created moments of delight.
Spatial Audio Cues
Audio signals for battles and puzzle progression guiding players without breaking immersion
Interactable Objects
Tactile, responsive elements that made the world feel alive and rewarded curiosity
Unique Enemy Behaviors
NPC variety that surprised players and made encounters genuinely memorable
+ Add screenshots here
Recommended: enemy & weapon variation screenshots and puzzle area images from the project
I opened with a structured stakeholder session to surface the team’s vision and assumptions about player behavior. From there, I facilitated a collaborative world-mapping exercise — similar to a product wireframe — that broke the experience into discrete areas, each with defined mechanics, goals, and atmosphere.
What it accomplished
Kept the team aligned as design decisions evolved, and gave us a shared artifact to reference during testing — more actionable than any slide deck I could have handed them.
A secondary benefit
It introduced the team to design thinking as a collaborative practice, not just a research output — changing how they thought about decisions, not just which decisions they made.
What I’d do differently
Build live playtesting sessions into the research plan from day one — not just as validation. In immersive media especially, behavior you observe in real time tells you things interviews can’t.
Constraint: Object capacity
I learned to rebuild assets using low-weight objects, taking on an optimization developer role alongside researcher to keep designs implementable within platform constraints.
Constraint: Platform bugs
Scripting bugs on Meta’s side paused relevant testing mid-sprint. I pivoted to design and modeling tasks — a decision that ultimately added to the project deliverables rather than just filling time.
