VR simulations for training that can't be practised for real

We develop virtual reality training applications where real-world practice is dangerous, expensive or rare. First we assess whether VR makes sense in your case. Then we verify the benefit with a pilot.

Assess the fit Discuss your training
Number of trainees and repetitions

Large-scale but safe

E-learning or 360° video. VR only for the practical part.

Custom simulation

Ideal for VR

Frequent, risky or expensive. Custom content pays back fastest.

Classic training is enough

Few people, low risk. VR rarely pays off.

Ready-made courses, rental

Rare but risky situations. A course library instead of development.

Risk and cost of real-world training

Our approach

VR does not replace training. It complements it where real practice is not possible.

Research shows mostly small to moderate benefits. The outcome depends on instructional design: a short focused scenario, theory outside the headset, a debrief with the trainer and verification in practice.

When it pays off

VR makes sense when at least one condition applies

The more conditions apply, the more likely development pays off. If none applies, we will recommend a cheaper form of training.

It pays off when

  • Real-world training is dangerous (heights, electricity, chemicals, fire, cranes)
  • Training requires expensive equipment or a line shutdown
  • The situation is rare and therefore can't be practised for real (accidents, crisis conversations)
  • Many people are trained, or training is repeated (onboarding, periodic training)
  • It is a spatial or motor skill, not reading regulations
  • You need the same training quality across multiple sites

What research says

The benefit of VR is real. But it is not automatic.

A summary of meta-analyses we work with. Including results that do not confirm a universal advantage of VR.

  • Vocational and corporate training53 studies

    Compared with control groups: better knowledge, attitudes and motivation, and on-the-job behaviour. How long the effect lasts is less certain.

    Source: Bödding, Schriek, Maier (2025)
  • Safety training52 studies

    VR outperformed traditional training in knowledge acquisition and retention. Only 36% of the studies measured long-term retention.

    Source: Scorgie et al. (2024)
  • Transfer to real performanceEqually effective

    VR, AR and MR training is as effective as traditional training. Its value lies mainly where danger or cost prevents traditional training.

    Source: Kaplan et al. (2021)
  • Methodological quality180 studies

    A moderate effect overall, but not significant in the most rigorous studies. A general conclusion that “VR teaches better” cannot be drawn yet.

    Source: Layadi et al. (2026)

That is why every deployment starts with a pilot and a comparison group.

What we deliver

From assessment to a finished simulation

We help you decide whether and how to use VR. When it makes sense, we develop the simulation to fit your needs.

01

Independent consultancy

We assess whether VR suits a specific training task and propose the path to an application.

  • choice of task and a measurable goal
  • ready-made course or custom development
  • choice of headsets and device management
  • integration and onboarding
Learn more
02

Custom simulation development

Training applications for your machines, procedures and workplaces, developed by a game studio.

  • short scenarios with immediate feedback
  • records of errors, time and attempts to reveal weak spots
  • scenario updates when a machine or procedure changes
  • pilot and benefit evaluation
Discuss your training

Process

Pilot first, then roll-out

We don't promise the benefit in advance. We verify it with your people. We measure using the Kirkpatrick model: reaction, learning, behaviour and results.

  1. 1

    Choose a task

    One specific training where the problem is visible: injuries, errors, long onboarding, expensive equipment.

  2. 2

    Measurable goal

    For example shorter onboarding or fewer errors in the first independent work. We measure the baseline.

  3. 3

    Pilot with a small group

    We compare the VR group with a conventionally trained one. We also track motion sickness and how clear the controls are.

  4. 4

    Embed in training

    Theory outside the headset, short VR blocks, a debrief with the trainer and verification in real practice.

  5. 5

    Evaluate and adjust

    We evaluate the goal and adjust the scenarios. Only then do we extend to further tasks.

Do you have training that is hard to practise for real?

Describe the task to us. We will tell you whether VR suits it and what a pilot would look like.
Discuss your training
VR consulting
VR consulting