Interactive simulation vs 360 video
The short verdict
360 video is cheap to produce and good for orientation: showing a site, a procedure or a hazard. It cannot respond to what the trainee does.
Interactive simulation is the better choice when you want people to make decisions, move, work as a team and see the consequences. Research with mine rescue brigades found trainees noticed exactly that gap.
Last checked 12 November 2026. Spot something out of date? Tell us and we will fix it.
Firsthand XR product render. We do not show other vendors’ products or logos.
Where 360 video is strong
- 360 video is quick to film and works on almost any headset or phone.
- It is good for site familiarisation and showing real people and places.
- In a Coal Services funded study, 88% of trainees rated their 360 VR session successful or very successful.
Side by side
| Feature | 360 video | Firsthand XR |
|---|---|---|
| What the trainee does | Looks around. Sometimes picks from a menu. | Walks, reaches, assesses and acts in a 6DoF room-scale space. |
| Response to actions | None. The video plays the same way each time. | Live patient engine and scenario state respond to every action. |
| Team practice | Hard. Each viewer sees the same footage. | Team sessions with roles on the same network. |
| Scoring | Usually a quiz afterwards. | Actions timed and scored, with a debrief. |
| Production | Fast and cheap to film. | Built in 3D. New scenarios take longer to make. |
| Realism | Real footage of real places. | Near-photoreal rendered rooms and equipment. |
Choose 360 video if
- You want to show people a real site before they visit.
- You need content fast and the learning goal is awareness.
Choose Firsthand XR if
- You want trainees to practise decisions and see consequences.
- You want physical activity and teamwork inside the scenario.
- You want scored performance, not just completion.
Questions people ask
Is 360 video VR?
It is often watched in a VR headset, but trainees cannot move through the scene or change what happens. Interactive simulation is built in 3D so they can.
What did mine rescue trainees say about 360 VR?
Most rated it successful, but 36% found it lacked realism, and limitations included lack of group coordination, physical activity and active motion. See our article on what Mines Rescue brigades said they need.
Sources
- Perez, Palmisano and Pedram (2016), Evaluating the impact of VR-based training on competency of rescue brigades, Final Report for Coal Services Health and Safety Trust
- Pedram (2018), Evaluating Virtual Reality-based Training Programs for Mine Rescue Brigades in New South Wales (Australia), PhD thesis, University of Wollongong
Product and company names are trademarks of their owners and are used only to identify their products. This page is our own comparison and is not endorsed by any company named. Information about other products is taken from their public websites on the date shown and may have changed.
See it in a headset
Book a 30-minute demo. We will run a scenario live, talk through your training units and scope a pilot that fits your team.
