The amount of interest in Virtual Reality (VR) research has significantly increased over the past few years, both in academia and industry. The release of commercial VR Head-Mounted Displays (HMDs) has been a major contributing factor. However, there is still much to be learned, especially how views and input techniques, as well as their interaction, affect the VR experience. There is little work done on First-Person Shooter (FPS) games in VR, and those few studies have focused on a single aspect of VR FPS. They either focused on the view, e.g., comparing VR to a typical 2D display or on the controller types. To the best of our knowledge, there are no studies investigating variations of 2D/3D views in HMDs, controller types, and their interactions. As such, it is challenging to distinguish findings related to the controller type from those related to the view. If a study does not control for the input method and finds that 2D displays lead to higher performance than VR, we cannot generalize the results because of the confounding variables. To understand their interaction, we propose to analyze in more depth, whether it is the view (2D vs. 3D) or the way it is controlled that gives the platforms their respective advantages. To study the effects of the 2D/3D views, we created a 2D visual technique, PlaneFrame, that was applied inside the VR headset. Our results show that the controller type can have a significant positive impact on performance, immersion, and simulator sickness when associated with a 2D view. They further our understanding of the interactions that controllers and views have and demonstrate that comparisons are highly dependent on how both factors go together. Further, through a series of three experiments, we developed a technique that can lead to a substantial performance, a good level of immersion, and can minimize the level of simulator sickness.