It's curious that when I started photographing 360° panoramas it was VR, but now that we have real 3D VR I think of them more as panoramic images... and yet every reference to VR here points to 360° panoramas. For the most part it's just semantics BUT when it comes to online viewing it is perhaps a useful distinction to at least keep in mind. VR viewers for displaying equirectangular images suck IMO when compared to viewers that actually project the image as a sphere. Telling views are the zenith and nadir, but you'll also see straight lines start to get warped more as you look up e.g. the viewer used on NWDA (
http://www.nwdastore.com/360-gallery/). See screengrab below... an awesome panorama that brings to mind the "rocket sled car" urban legend
Compare this to a traditional spherical panorama viewer:
https://www.360cities.net/image/candor-chasma-peru (It's actually on Mars but I geotagged it with the right coordinates... auto titling and all that...) and look straight down. They also support image tiling so you can show off your renders at really high resolution. Maybe something to keep in mind when you're looking at presenting your work. 360 Cities use KRPano which has a number of options from multires
https://krpano.com/html5multires/ to VR
https://krpano.com/krpanocloud/webvr/?v=119pr10 and video e.g.
https://d8d913s460fub.cloudfront.net/krpanocloud/video/airpano/index.html?v=119pr10&html5=only all in HTML5. The hardest part for photographers is creating the content, but TG has a great spherical camera (including STEREO) that makes generating the required files easy.