# Which VR collaboration platforms provide spatial presence compared to traditional video conferencing tools?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Hello G2 users, which VR collaboration platforms provide spatial presence compared to traditional video conferencing tools? I've been making exactly this comparison for my own team, coming from years of video calls, and working through the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/vr-collaboration"><strong>VR collaboration</strong></a> category taught me to answer it in two parts: what spatial presence actually adds over video, and then which platforms are built to deliver which version of it.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">What spatial presence adds that video structurally can't, from the category's own definition of these tools: shared position in a common space, so side conversations, spatial audio, and turning to face someone all work like a room; shared objects at human scale, walking around a model instead of watching someone's screen share of it; and embodied attention, where you can see what a colleague is looking at. Video's counter-advantages are just as structural: zero hardware barrier, real faces, and frictionless recording. The honest comparison is a trade, not an upgrade, and G2's own category guidance lists the hardware, bandwidth, and physical-space demands as this technology's standing challenges, which is where video keeps winning by default. . Here's both parts as I worked them out: </p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/glue/reviews"><strong>Glue</strong></a> and <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/meetinvr/reviews"><strong>MeetinVR</strong></a>: The meeting-presence specialists: Glue's whole stated existence is remote meetings as great as face-to-face, and MeetinVR positions on distributed-team meetings with cohesion effects (both vendor-stated). If your question is literally can my weekly meeting feel like a room again, these two are the direct candidates, with historical bases and, like everything here, no current reviews to confirm the 2026 experience.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/arthur-technologies-gmbh-arthur/reviews"><strong>Arthur</strong></a>: The presence-plus-work answer: 3D interactive spaces with productivity features for enterprises (vendor-stated), historically reviewed as realistic and immersive. For teams that need the meeting and the work artifacts in the same space, presence here is a means, not the product.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/spatial/reviews"><strong>Spatial</strong></a>: The bridge answer for the video-to-VR transition this question implies: VR, AR, desktop, and mobile in one room (vendor-stated), so your team migrates gradually, headset adopters get spatial presence, holdouts join from the browser, and nobody's excluded meeting one. In practice, I suspect this hybrid is how most teams honestly cross from video, because the alternative is mandating hardware on day one.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Having lived on video, spatial presence is real and it's specifically valuable for the meetings video does worst, working sessions around shared 3D things, brainstorms that need a room's energy, and social connection across distance. It is not worth the friction for status updates, and any vendor implying otherwise is selling headsets, not outcomes. Pick the two meeting types video fails your team on, and pilot exactly those. Would like to know your experience in using VR spatial presence over video conferencing?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: about 2 months ago
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;I&#39;ve spent a fair amount of time on both sides of this, and my honest take is that spatial presence is genuinely valuable for specific meetings. Working sessions where my team needs to walk around a shared model together, or brainstorms that need the energy of being in a room, those work noticeably better in VR. But for a status update or a quick check-in, the friction of getting everyone into headsets isn&#39;t worth it.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: about 2 months ago
- Author title: SEO Content Specialist





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4