# Interaction in eXtended Reality Applications for Cultural Heritage
## 6 Conclusions  
We presented our experience in enabling interaction with digital cultural heritage applications. We found that natural interaction using gestures recognized by the Kinect motion sensor was too demanding for the users and distracted them from the storytelling. In Virtual Reality applications, we facilitated the interaction with the UI through the use of controllers, interaction to simulate motion, interaction with digitized exhibits, and gameplay interaction. As the applications were designed for all target audiences, we tried to keep them simple and intuitive.  
In the described digital cultural heritage applications, we implemented our research on interactive digital storytelling that resulted in the development of a hyper-storytelling methodology. The use of actors in digital storytelling added a human empathy dimension to our 3D reconstructions. We designed and developed virtual presentations of more than thirty cultural heritage objects and sites in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Italy, Malta, Albania, Serbia, and Montenegro. We digitally presented intangible heritage from several European and Asian countries.  
User experience evaluation studies showed which of them were successful and what drawbacks users recognized. We also encountered the Virtual Reality sickness problem and overcame it by introducing static reference objects in the user's field of view. Moreover, we used the teleport function instead of movement wherever possible in order to avoid the potential risk of VR sickness as we noticed that some users were not comfortable with the walking simulation. This did not reduce the perception of immersive virtual environments nor of their cognitive representations because our environments were not complex and the movement was not a significant part of the experience.  
In Augmented Reality applications, the interaction was kept simple, and standard methods for mobile devices were used. The users were excited to navigate through the 360 videos by moving their devices around them.  
We can conclude that interaction on XR digital heritage applications needs to be simple and intuitive, as they are installed in museums or online and are available to all visitors regardless of their age and computer literacy. In museums, the staff needs to be ready to assist the users who are not familiar with VR headsets. We can see similar findings in [PERSON]'s closing words [27]. We believe that in the future, the price of VR devices will decrease, and they will become available to more users. Therefore, we need tocontinue exploring the most suitable interaction techniques that facilitate interactive digital storytelling, one of the most immersive techniques for experiencing cultural heritage.  
Conceptualization, S.R.; methodology, S.R.; software, I.I.-K. and E.S.; validation, S.R., B.M. and D.B.; formal analysis, D.B.; investigation, B.M.; resources, B.M., I.I.-K. and I.P.; data curation, D.B.; writing--original draft preparation, S.R., V.O. and D.B; writing-- review and editing, S.R.; visualization, S.R.; supervision, S.R.; project administration, S.R.; funding acquisition, S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research was funded by the cross-border cooperation \"Amusing Museums\" (aMUSe-umlNG) funded by the European Union within the cross-border program Bosnia and Herzegovina--Montenegro and Tourist Community of Canton Sarajevo\".  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.  
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript.