<p>When users begin to experience virtual reality (VR) for the first time, they can be met with some degree of motion sickness and nausea, especially if continuous joystick locomotion is used. The symptoms that are induced during these VR experiences fall under the umbrella term cybersickness, and due to these uncomfortable experiences, these users can get a bad first impression and abandon the innovative technology, not able to fully appreciate the convenience and fascinating adventures VR has to offer. As such, this project compares the effects of two cybersickness mitigation methods (Dynamic Field of View (FOV) and Virtual Reference Frame), both against each other and combined, on user-reported cybersickness symptoms to determine the best combination to implement in commercial applications to help create more user-friendly VR experiences. The hypothesis is that combining the FOV reduction and the resting frame methods can mitigate VR cybersickness more effectively without hindering the user’s experience and the virtual nose method is more potent at mitigating cybersickness compared to dynamic FOV. To test these hypotheses, an experimental game was developed for the Meta Quest 2 with five levels: a tutorial level and four maze levels (one for each scenario). The participants were asked to complete the tutorial level until they got used to the virtual reality controls, and then they were instructed to complete the maze level twice with one of the following conditions for each run: no method, dynamic field of view only, virtual nose only, and dynamic field of view and virtual nose combined. After completing each maze trial, the participants were asked to complete a simulator sickness questionnaire to get their thoughts on how much sickness they felt during the test. Upon concluding the testing phase with 36 participants and compiling the data, the results showed that while the subjects preferred the dynamic FOV method even though they were able to complete the trials significantly faster with the virtual nose method, it is inconclusive regarding which method is truly more effective. Furthermore, the results showed that it is also inconclusive if the scenario with both methods enabled is significantly better or worse than either method used separately.</p>