Hot Topic: 3D Or Not 3D?  That Is The Question...

If you were to believe the industry execs on the whole 3D gaming issue and judge your opinion based entirely on their comments, you’d be right to insinuate that 3D gaming is to take/or is taking the world by storm.  Ubisoft have said they expect every home to have a 3D TV by the end of 2013; Sony last year said that they fully expect that every home will have a 3D TV by the end of 2010; and market researcher, Insight Media and their recent survey, predicts that there will be an audience of over 40 million 3D TV gamers by the end of 2014.  That’s the pretty picture that the execs paint, but I can tell you from down here on planet earth, that things look a hell of a lot different.  It seems that the only ones who don’t really see the fascination with this 3D gaming craze are the ones who buy the games: the gamers themselves. 

3D specs with a pic of Faith in the background?  Is this a sign? 

So why aren’t gamers going head over heels for 3D gaming?  According to Microsoft's Director of Product Management for the Xbox 360 and Xbox Live, Aaron Greenberg, he reckons there just isn’t the consumer demand for it, something that is a result of such a high price-point on the technology; “I think it's unclear how much demand there is for that.  I think it's clear that the technology is here, and I think we're seeing a lot of that, but it's a pretty big investment to buy a 3D TV.  I mean, it's exciting technology, but when it will ever reach mainstream adoption is unclear to us.” 

Jesse Divnich, EEDAR analyst, seems to agree with Greenberg’s insinuation that there is no consumer demand for it at present; “With the slow adoption rate for 3D televisions, EEDAR does not expect 3D gaming to be a significant driver of revenue and health for the industry over the short-term.”  In other words: “Analyst says something that is expensive and people aren’t buying won’t impact video game sales until they start buying it.”  How profound. 

What’s even more interesting is what Divnich follows that quote up with; “[But] as consumers naturally replace their televisions and adopt 3D television, 3D gaming will play an ever increasing role in driving revenue for the sector.”  Naturally?  That’s a little presumptuous don’t you think?  In order for something to be “naturally” adopted, there has to be a worthy reason for them to do it; and with 3D TVs, I personally don’t see that reason as gaming itself – this is coming from someone who’s had the chance to check out the 3D titles on the frontline. 

To anyone who says it’s the technology and its implementation that’s the problem, not just the price; they respond with the same argument again and again; and that’s that HD TVs had to overcome the same obstacles.  Sony’s Chief Exec, Sir Howard Stringer – the same one who said that there would be a 3D TV in every home by the end of 2010 – used that very analogy; “As with high-definition a few years back, there are a variety of issues yet to be addressed,” said Stringer, “But the 3D train is on the track, and we at Sony are ready to drive it home." 

Are you ready to don these shades for every gaming session? 

Even Ubisoft’s UK Marketing Director, Murray Pannell, suggested that its sales could be likened to that of the HD TV; “The truth is I think it is a technology that's coming.  We can't ignore it.  It'll start slowly this year.  But like HDTV I wouldn't rule out the fact that this will be installed in everyone's living room in three year's time.” 

So why did high-definition TVs triumph in the gaming world and where is 3D going wrong?  If it’s not the price-point, what is it? 

I’ve always said, and will until proved otherwise, that even if I was given a 3D TV, I would still game in the standard HD resolutions.  That to me says that the price has nothing to do with it and after reading countless message boards, our comments on the site, etc, I know I’m not alone.  This is coming from a fairly early adopter of a HD TV as well.  Why is that though? 

Well, high-definition gaming’s selling point was that it was all about impacting and enhancing the experience; and I’m not sure that 3D can do that over long periods.  After spending some time with Killzone 3, Motorstorm: Apocalypse and Gran Turismo 5 in 3D yesterday, I must say that it was an interesting experience that proved to me that 3D was great in ultra short bursts, but otherwise, it was rather uncomfortable and restricting.  And at the end of the day, when all is said and done, the games looked a lot better and more jaw-dropping in their standard HD resolutions, thus rendering 3D as an awkward sideways, almost backwards step. 

Once a business man, now "internet celebrity" *facepalm*

I don’t often quote the inane ramblings of Michael Pachter, Wedbush Morgan Securities’ Research Analyst, around here anymore, but even he echoes my sentiments here; “I think that 3D television adoption is going to take a long time.  The biggest impediment to 3D gaming is that you have to wear glasses, and you're not going to buy a 3D TV that requires glasses just to play games.  Some will, but the masses won't.”  Following on from that further, I’d personally say that you won’t buy a 3D TV and have to wear uncomfortable glasses, when the only enjoyment you’ll get out of them will play second fiddle to your standard HD gaming time.  If you’re going to adopt, the experience needs to “wow” you, like it did in the transition from standard-definition to high-definition. 

3D supporter, Nvidia, and their spokesperson, Bryan Del Rizzo, was quick to respond to those claims regarding the glasses; “Well, I always point out that yeah, you don't want to wear the glasses, but you have no problem strapping on a nerdy guitar and playing Guitar Hero.”  Again, I’m not sure that Del Rizzo sees why people do that and why they won’t do something similar for 3D gaming: it’s all about the experience.  Pretending you’re playing a guitar whilst playing along to your favourite bands vs. something that can give you a headache over long periods, that involves wearing glasses when you normally wouldn’t and taking an experience that isn’t as awe-inspiring as the experiences it is trying to replace.  Those, by the way, are not official findings by any means, but are my own personal experiences with the technology. 

An unknown SCE UK Sales Director was quoted as saying, “We’ve seen this in action and I must admit that I think 3D gaming is much more compelling than 3D movies because once you’ve experienced a game in 3D you’ll want to buy a 3D TV.  It certainly converted me.  It’s much more compelling.”  Well, Mr. Unknown Sales Director, I’m a little more neutral than you who’s looking to push Sony’s HD TVs and also get console sales out of it, and I can safely refute that claim by saying, “Sir, are you bloody mad?  Are we talking about the same technology here?”  But this is it.  At the moment, it’s as if people are trying to tell you what to think and are desperately trying to get you to buy into the hype, rather than actually getting the technology to sell itself. 

It may come as no surprise to hear Microsoft’s Aaron Greenberg back the cautious side on the 3D movement; after all, they aren’t throwing a ridiculous amount of money behind it. “ 3D is great in the theater, but for the living room?  I think we're a long way away from that,” he said.  Is Microsoft purposely being awkward though because the Xbox 360 isn’t a 3D-futureproofed machine?  Far from it. “ We’re a fully 3D-capable console today.  We support 3D games that are in the market today,” said Greenberg, before twisting the dagger on their console competitors, “We’re not a consumer electronics company that’s trying to sell 3D TVs, so we have the benefit of waiting until the market responds.” 

Crysis 2 is bloody stunning in HD, why spoil it? 

From my perspective, it’s all about the experience and 3D is a step sideways – if not backwards – from what I get to experience now.  Trying to sell a new technology on that is always destined to fail and after you’ve seen Crysis 2 in 3D and standard HD this fall, I’m fairly sure all of you will come to the same conclusion.  Don’t get me wrong, it’s not just the glasses that pinched my nose and were uncomfortable for the whole time I was playing, or even the headache it gave me, it’s just that 3D doesn’t drop your jaw as much as the title in its native HD resolution. 

There is however a potential in the technology for other uses, that we recently highlighted with a Sony patent in our news section.  This innovative use of 3D gaming allowed for multiple people in one room to all see a different picture to what everyone else was seeing.  With earphones built into the glasses themselves, they could even hear their own separate audio channel.  Such uses of the technology could signal the end of split-screen gaming as we know it, if the patent is to be believed that is, and it could even potentially stop your friend from seeing where you were in a local multiplayer match too – the swine!  But to sell a TV on this function alone?  Or sell a game on this one use?  I’m not sure the idea is that beneficial then.  For instance, I see no need for that in my house, but I at least recognise the need in some homes, but then again, when you insert those earphones, you remove the social aspect of local multiplayer gaming. 

So what does this mean for 3D?  Will a massive 3D TV price-drop in the coming years fuel its flight to the top?  Well, yes and no.  Of course more people will purchase 3D TVs if they were much, much cheaper, but actually getting them to game on it is a different kettle of fish.  Is it just as essential to remove the barriers though, like the glasses for instance?  Nvidia’s Bryan Del Rizzo reckons that the glasses will soon be phased out by advancements in the technology; “Of course people would prefer not to put on a pair of glasses and we will definitely get to the point where they aren't needed.”  From my perspective though, that still won’t be enough.  The experience needs to 1-up the experience that it’s trying to replace, and at the moment, it doesn’t.  Until they can deliver those jaw-dropping HD visuals, in a clear 3D environment without the obstacles, I fear that 3D is destined to be a fad. 

Luckily though, as is always the case, no-one’s forcing you to buy into this technology or even believe the PR lines that the top execs are spouting, and so, while they attempt to get this out of their systems, I hear there’s some good HD games coming out... like Crysis 2. “ It’s in 3D as well,” you say?  Oh, well that’s nice for it. 

Please share with us your experiences with 3D gaming in the comments if you’ve had the “pleasure” of testing it out.  We’d love to hear whether you share our hesitancy in the technology or we’re just getting bitter and cynical in our old age. 

Editor’s Note: Hot Topic is a monthly feature here on X360A, where we take one of the month’s talking points and discuss it until your eye-balls bleed through sheer delight.  Now that's intense! 

Eh I think they are way overzealous in their predictions for 3D. A lot of people are like me where 3D is just an uncomfortable experience.  I can barely stand a short little stretch of 3D without starting to get a twinge of a headache, I couldnt imagine viewing 3D for hours on end like I do HD.  I dont really ever see myself embracing this technology. 

There already is "Glasses Free" 3D...They take a thin layer of the same material that is used on the glasses and place it over the screen with slits so it's visible...But the only problem with that is it can only be viewed from a straight angle...It cannot be viewed any other way then straight on. 

3D is really cool tech.  I saw Toy Story 3 in Polarized Stereoscopic 3D. It was a lot of fun and very enjoyable.  By the end though, the glasses were hurting my nose a lot.  I can see how 3D can cause visual discomfort though. 

Personally, I'm not too big on 3D. Sony is going huge with supporting 3D. As far as I know, Avatar is the only 3D Xbox game and Ghost Recon Future Soldier will be the next. 

What are the negatives of 3D?  It is really expensive.  It can be discomforting for some people and for others doesn't work (ie: people with a Lazy Eye, etc.).  It sucks away Processing power.  It has to render the on screen images twice in each polarity.  This means a 3D game sucks away twice the processing power.  And even with 3D off, I'm sure there isn't two graphical quality settings based on 3D on or off.  This leaves games not to meat their full graphical potential. 

With these 3 issues, I will not ever adopt 3D for myself.  It is amazing, but very gimmicky. 

its like blue ray, or the power glove.  gimicky technology.  they think people are going to fork out another 5 grand for a "game feature" when most people wont even buy a blue ray player and HDDVD failed i know alot of people that still havent brought their HD TV.  So at best this technology is interesting but the article is right it simply has to have the WOW factor to motivate the kind of change people are talking about.  and price is Always going to be an issue when technology advances as fast as it does.  no one wants to buy their Television and then see it 500 dollars cheeper in 2 weeks or worse have it be useless in 2 years like Hd dvd or laserdisc. 

#5- the main negative of 3d is not that it doesn't work for people with lazy eye as much as for most people with glasses the second pair are very uncomfortable/unuseable.  until it works without glasses, and from more than one angle so that two people can watch together, i don't think gaming will become 3D at all.  also the only other game i can add to your list of 3D games is the arkham asylum goty edition

3d and motion controlls are both something i highly disagree with, just like the toilet disagrees to flush after ive had a curry xD

they are both a waste of technology, having to wear glasses everytime i wanna play a game would just become another pain in the ass, like having to find your wireless headset when someone wants to talk, then finind the wired one when that runs out of batterys. 

ive seen films in 3d, not much difference, ive played games in 3d, no difference atall. 

In short HD>3D I hate 3D as when i first watched a 3D movie and played Batman:AA GOTY i expected it to be 3D when it actually isn't.  There's just a few bits here and there which 'pop' out of the screen and it's just borderline realistic. 

I find it funny that all the big electronic companies are pushing this so hard.  The economy still sucks, yet they think everyone will shell out 2-3 grand to replace the HD tv's we just got within the last five years.  We don't want glasses.  Period.  The glasses are a killing point for me.  I also doubt that playing a 3D game for 4-5 hours straight will be good for the eyes.  Face it, a lot of us play for extended periods of time.  I like new tech when there is a point to it.  I bought HD when it was new and feel that it was a good investment.  3D is unappealling to me on every level.  Hopefully, it will come and go, and not become the norm for games. 

@13 People with glasses can still experience 3d, I'm one of them.  It's just that putting glasses over glasses is strange and possibly more uncomfortable than people who don't wear glasses.  I mean, if I'm just seeing a movie that's about an hour and a half, I deal with the glasses, but if I had to wear them for 4-5 hours at a time while gaming, sometimes even more, I can see myself throwing the glasses out the window and going back to regular HD gaming.  Until they come out with TV's that don't require glasses and actually have the 3D wow me, I'm gonna stick with my normal HD TV. 

I agree with most people on here.  I just can't fathom sitting for a few hours with special glasses on.  Heck I wear real glasses when I don't feel like putting contacts in and it's annoying as is.  I can't wait for this 3D fad to go away. 

I only prefer 3D in Cinema, because the quality is loads better than watching the 2D version, I don't know if I could stand it with gaming though since I wear glasses and maybe after 2 hours or so, it gets really uncomfortable, glasses + 3D glasses, I know there is a thing such as contact lenses, but I wouldn't want to use them, as far as I know, if they fall out they are devils to find again. 

@13, that is a stupid question, its just I would say more uncomfortable for us, but we can still see the 3D.

In my opinion, 3d just doesn't look good enough.  Not only does it hardly seem to work for me (do i have a lazy eye?),  lets take Avatar as an example (the movie).  I enjoyed the movie far more in the standard version, it was much sharper etc.  I see why people might call it a step backwards. 

Also, the TV would have to be huge.  I tested a 3d tv in a shop in Shanghai, and while the tv was large, it didn't cover my entire field of view, making it seem rather fake. 

I hope the next generation of consoles exceeds the limit of hd tv's, with the 3d graphics made sharper and better.  As soon as HD becomes outdated, the more developed 3d might have a chance. 

The glasses are the big thing for me.  I haven't had any experience with 3D gaming, but from my experience with movies (like Avatar), the discomfort of wearing the glasses to view 3D (hurts my eyes, headaches) totally destroys any positive effect the 3D provides. 

And like the article said, 3D really doesn't look much better than standard HD, if at all.  Maybe by the time glasses-free 3D is the norm, the tech will have advanced to the point that it can really blow us away, and then I'll give it a chance, but I'm not holding my breath. 

Aren't games already in 3D?  I mean, we're not playing Mr. Game and Watch or anything like that.  I'm sick of the 3D fad, especially in the movie theaters.  Ever since Avatar came out 4/5 movies now come in '3D'.  Like really, come on!  It's just another gimmick in my opinion.  I don't need no glasses to enjoy my viewing experience. 

"Once a business man, now "internet celebrity" *facepalm*" My thoughts exactly.  Every time I see an article on any site with the headline "Pachter says ______", I say "Pachter needs to shut the fuck up." 

Anyway, 3D. The 3DS is the only device with this 3D tech that I give a hoot about (and mostly for its other great features, honestly).  Why?  NO GLASSES.  I'm glad that Sony and all these other companies working on the tech all have employees with 20/20 vision to develop the 3D glasses, because that's clearly who they are making those glasses for.  What about me and others like me who need regular glasses just to see the normal HD picture on my TV in non-blur-o-vision?  Oops, we're fucked I guess.  One hand to juggle the 3D glasses on our face, and one hand to try and work a game controller?  Not going to work guys! 

So as long as their tech says "FUCK YOU AND YOUR LESS THAN PERFECT VISION" to me, I say "FUCK YOU AND YOUR STUPID GOGGLES AND EXPENSIVE TV" right back. 

I got to personally play a 3D game on a 3D TV (Dead Rising 2 demo) at comic con this year, I also got a chance to watch some of Monsters vs. Aliens in 3D not too long ago and my chief complaint is that the image seems to shutter.  things will be happening and the only 1 image you focus on (albeit a zombie, or alien) is in 3D while the rest of the image seems out of focus.  It distracted me enough whilst trying to kill zombies that I actually preferred to continue the demo with the glasses off on a blurry screen. 

3D will never capture the masses with glasses that need to be charged (ya you actually have to charge the batteries in the glasses for them to work and even then it is still hard to tell if they are on and working right) The price point is too high, and the most important reason 3D won't catch on anytime soon is that no one except the TV, movie, and game makers seem to want it

Just like I've been telling others, when HD was released, people complained of issues.  It was too blurry, it gave headaches, it was expensive.  Doubt it all you want, but this happened with Blu-Ray as well.  It was more expensive, did not play on a DVD player, and the HD increase was something that only hardcore viewers would notice.  Now it's 3D TV.  People are complaining now, but watch; in a couple of years it'll be something everyone wants.  It has already been announced that they are working on televisions that DO NOT require glasses(like the Nintendo 3DS) and 3D tv's that not only have 3D 1080p visuals, but can support 2-3 different full screen programs at once. 

The technology is getting there and it WILL happen.  So many people complained about HDTV that it was almost removed from the market(1998 - look it up.)  Now look at it.  People love HD tv and that's basically the only type of tv being sold now. 

Soon it will happen.  Don't hate just because it has a few problems.  It's only first gen.  Just remember, the first HD TVs weren't 1080p, so give 3D some time to perfect itself...

it was bound to happen to gaming sooner or later, it's all you ever hear on the adverts for films (TOY STORY 3, IN 3D!  SHREK IN 3D!)  but like someone already said, at the minute it's only a gimmick.  the only '3D' i've ever been truly wowed by is IMAX 3D, now that's proper 3D; it feels like you're actually at the scene of the film but the main reason for that is beacuse of the huge screen.  3D might become quite popular eventually but for now its just a gimmick, and looking through comments, the two I saw about playing games 3D were both negative, its just not that exciting. 

as soon as i become a millionnaire and can buy a huge IMAX screen and play games 3D on that then i'll support 3D games :)

@22 - Though I agree that Blu-Ray isn't gimmicky, I would say it's far less enjoyable to watch than a standard DVD, simply because it sucks you right out of the experience.  The same seems to go for 3D. Rather than being an immersive medium, it distracts from what should be the focus.  I don't care if either exist for the moment, but only so long as they don't advance these fads at the expense of DVD and HD gaming. 

@29 - Have you actually used 3D glasses aside from the ones they give you at the movie theaters?  I wear glasses to see correctly as well, and I also use the Samsung 3d glasses.  They fit just about perfectly over my glasses(a little tight, but nothing to complain about), so either you have bottle-glasses, or you haven't tried the Samsung glasses yet.  Try them on, they fit great. 

My friend went to a digital signing show in LA this year and said about how there are 3d tvs that dont need the glasses although I am sure they will be expensive when they come out I would rather wait for those instead of wearing the stupid glasses. 

3D sucks.  Every ten years they bring this back out and it fails then they wait ten more years.  The only reason its picking up steam this time is because of stupid kid movies that have been drawing kids in with 3D. I never go see movies in 3D, it adds an extra 5-10 dollars per ticket and never adds anything into the experience.  I havent seen 3D games yet but i hope this trend leaves soon before more stuff becomes 3D.

at some point they will eliminate the need for glasses; this is just the foundation for a new era of 3d technology. 

has anyone seen how the 3DS looks while actually playing a game on it?  sure they can brag that u dont need glasses, but they didnt actually show how it would look/appear on the screen while you are playing it.  seems kind of dirty to me, to brag about a device to have a particular feature, yet not even show how that feature looks. 

anyways, the 3d tvs right now are considered "active" 3d, the glasses have internal electronics. " passive" is just regular glasses without any electronic components.  apparently they are working on "passive" tv sets right now, to eliminate the bulky, heavy, and have-to-recharge "active" glasses. 

when more 3d games come out, im bringing my xbox and ps3 to work to try them out in 3d, we have a samsung 3d tv up for demo purposes right now.  never sold one yet, but it's got people's attention, ha ha. 

as of right now, all reviews and opinions are mixed, some like it, some dont.  i cant wait to see where we are come christmas, or this time next year. 

shooters dont work, too laggy because the timing has to be to the millisecond, which the tv cant process at the same time its trying to process the 3d.  slower games like FF13 looked good, and because its a generally slower game, worked better, yet there was noticeable lag. 

all in all, the games NEED to be developed in 3d to work properly and to eliminate lag between you pressing the button and your action happening on the tv. 

3D sucks.  I don't want no glasses-only gaming/movie experience and have to suffer with blurry screens to play games or watch movies I enjoy because they make them ONLY in 3D. Thats my fear down the road.  Go ahead with the 3D for those that want it, but the market, I believe, isn't there for gaming in the least and if it is at all it is only there for the poor fools who become obsessed in each and every fad that comes out, the parents and such that get suckered by their not so smart children to buy this or buy that and end up in some strange reason being pulled into the fold themselves.  Its a mystery to me why 3D has become such a big issue again.  I'm only 21 yet I still remember the whole 3d hype or whatever during the 90s and it was PATHETIC.  We're seeing the same shit done today that happened then: 3D slapped on to a title to sell: example, Avatar the last airbender 3D!  More like 2D with blurryness.  But thats a shitty movie in the first place.  James Camerons Avatar started this whole 3D obsession up again, when enjoyment wise, I think 3D would be a distraction and make things less fun, rather than more. 

Hmmmm......Last I heard everyone doesn't even have a HD TV yet.  And as for folks like me who do have one, do you really think we are all going to run out and replace our perfect good TV with 3D?  Further more, why bother?....Most TV stations don't even broadcast in HD, let alone 3D and I certainly am not going to buy a 3D TV just for gaming even though I can easily afford it.  And the glasses!!!  Seriously, I already wear glasses, having another pair on over those for a 2 hour theatre movie is tres uncomforatable.  Further more the prices for the glasses are atrocious.  Until TVs meet the standard set by the 3DS (ie..no glasses) albeit on a larger screen, I don't see this catching on.  I suspect that the current push for 3D TVs by manufacturers is simply a bit ahead of its time (somewhat like the long lost laser-disc).  The market is just not ready for this technology yet. 

It was a gimmick in the 80's and I think its still a gimmick now, Yeah the 3D films do look impressive at the cinema but thats it, unless you have a wall sized tv its completely pointless for home use.  and if you have largish family (I.E. man, wife and 3+ kids) its gonna work out quite expensive to keep replacing the inevitably breaking glasses (they are not the most stirdiest of devices), and also most of the big brand 3D Glasses won't work with other brands (sony glasses wont work on say a LG 3Dtv)..

So Balls to 3D, I'm more than happy with my 47" HDTV and Blu rays thanks, Oh and you can stick 3D gaming up your arse as well. 

"Ubisoft have said they expect every home to have a 3D TV by the end of 2013; Sony last year said that they fully expect that every home will have a 3D TV by the end of 2010;"

Jog on.  3D is an awesome gimmick admittedly.. But it's not practical.  I just think it's a waste of time, money and effort.  The main buyers of 3D TV technology will be people with more money than sense.  I'm not saying this is every buyer, but it's most of them. 

Ah, now this is something I have been ranting to everyone about lately.  Apologies in advance, for I feel another rant coming on ! 

I have gone to see a couple 3D films in the cinema, and to be honest all the people I was with said that the tint on the glasses makes everything seem drained of colour and washed out. 

I can't really comment on the colour, as I have an eye that is very close to being useless.  When watching 3D one half of each image is clear, and the other is blurry and its STILL in 2D. I also get the constact feeling that my eyes are going to shrivel up and die due to constant refocusing they do in truing to see the image clearly.  So the colour was the least of my worries. 

Many reports say that only a small minority are unable to see 3D (by small minority they mean around 10%, not really that small is it). ( I am also not happy with the way all big films are now shown in the cinema 10 times a day in "glorious 3D", but if you want to watch the 2D version you have to take the day off work as they only show them when the cinema is quiet)

I agree that for people with good vision it works, and may even work well.  However the current technology forces your eyes to go out of focus on what is essentially a 2D image and "trick" your brain into thinking that you are seeing something that is 3D. This is not really good for your eyes, and you will most likely end up with a lazy eye condition, and will no longer be able to watch anything in 3D. Seems quite self defeating. 

The whole thing will of course be pushed by Sony, as they have a vested interest in selling TV's and 3D movies.  3D will be good, once it is actual 3D holographic images right in front of you, but I think we are a long way away from that. 

3D is a gimmick that is useless and needs to die.  Game developers need to spend the extra money they use to create their games in 3D to actually focus on creating the best games possible.  I assume that since it costs more to see a movie the is shown in 3D, that games with this tech will probably also be a bit more exensive, and that is just an expense I and everyone I know are not willing to accept.  I am begging developers, take the resources and create new IPs, perfect established ones, and nip this useless technology in the bud. 

As long as the games have a setting to either turn on or off 3D, then I don't really care what the industry does.  I also watch Toy Story 3 in 3D and as great as it was, I got a really bad headache from the glasses.  That's coming from someone that doesn't ever get headaches.  I think 3D will become more popular as the cost for it drops.  As for me, I'll pass on it for my brain's sake. 

Though it is about the future related to the xbox i feel that the 3DS from nintendo should get a mention because alot of things are really riding on that platform more than any other when it comes to 3D

OK.  I am going to honest and say I did not read the full article cause I got bored.  Why?  Cause, I feel the same way about 3D as the guy wrote the article.  So, I know pretty much knew what to expect.  So, I am going to share my view.  If it is already written in the article then my apologise. 

First off, reality check: 3D is not going to take off, not in this generation anyway.  Because the consoles of today were not made for this kind of technology.  They were HD Ready and were designed to push High Definition graphics.  The engines were optimised for that purpose (Anyone remember the head honcho of Epic saying that they will not optimise their Unreal Engine for Wii as it will be like taking a step back).  So trying to execute that kind of effect using engines that cannot muster that kind of power on consoles that were not created to create 3D effects is futile.  Take a look at Avatar: The game.  The frame rate dropped when 3D effects were enabled.  That pretty much explains everything

I reckon 3D will kick off with the Next Gen consoles with PS4, Xbox 3 and the next nintendo console.  The increase in demand from developers will push the consoles in that way, just like it did with HD.  But this generation, not a chance.  No matter what the PR says for consoles and games, 3D effects cannot be executed on current consoles without hampering the overall gaming experience with pop-up issues, frame rate drops etc. 

I think the only 3D gaming ill be playing will be the 3DS...Nintendo's going in the right direction with that.  No glasses AND you can set how intense the 3D is.  Looks downright amazing.  I think they said they were able to achieve that though because the screen is so small

Is it me or does sony always seem to make the wrong decision with things?  They assumed people would buy the ps3 over the xbox becasue of the blue ray, they assumed that having 2 controler ports in a ps2 was a "good idea" The psp will outsell the DS, i wont even mentino the music and tv sector.  It just seems that they are not a company to back. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with hdtv's 3d gaming is just pointless, and as for sony saying that every home will have a 3dtv by the end of the year... it is just funny that they think everone in the whole world is as rich as them, and can just go out and by a 3dtv just like that, well they will be very very disappointed. 

Until they bring out something that is completely immersive, like something out of a PK Dick story, I'm not buying.  I hate 3D at the cinema, it has it's place yes, but they have taken it too far to fill the void where original material used to be. 

"The experience needs to 1-up the experience that it’s trying to replace, and at the moment, it doesn’t.  Until they can deliver those jaw-dropping HD visuals, in a clear 3D environment without the obstacles, I fear that 3D is destined to be a fad." 

This sums up my feelings on the matter perfectly.  I love HD gaming and I also really enjoyed the few 3D movies I have seen, but until I can look at the whole screen in 3D with no glasses and no blurry bits towards the edges of the screen and be wowed by it like I was the first time I gamed in 1080p I won't be fully sold on it. 

I will definitely stay tuned though :) The possibilities in a few years are quite exciting...

while I wouldn't rule out buying one I wouldn't pay any more than for the same size HDTV!  I certainly wouldn't wear the glasses (incidentaly a lot of 3d movies arent all in 3d - toystory 3 certainly wasn't)

so yeah if its cheap or becomes 'standard' I might one day get one but its a developing technology and untill its standadised i wouldn't touch it- ask anyone who bought a betamax player or a HDDVD player! 

First of all, I'm not buying into the whole 3D thing anytime soon because I just spent $2000 on a new TV right before any 3D TV was available. 

Second, whenever manufactures talk about their 3D TVs they never really mention the glasses factor.  Sure, some TVs might come with 2 pair of glasses.  But most people that can afford to buy into this tech are going to have families. 

So not only do you have to buy the TV, you gotta buy 2 or more extra pair of glasses.  And what about friends?  You can't have a Superbowl party and only have two pair of glasses.  What are you supposed to do?  Tell everyone to bring their own? 

Then you have to worry about where you are going to store these glasses.  FFS, people lose TV remotes daily.  Could you imagine losing a $150 pair of glasses or stepping/sitting on them and breaking them?  And your kids would surely destroy pair after pair accidentally. 

And what if you already wear glasses?  Its bad enough wearing one pair, but putting two on just to watch TV isn't going to be comfortable at all. 

No one is going to spend all this money on a 3D TV just to use the 3D feature once or twice a week for a movie or two.  If they spend this money, they are going to want to use it all the time.  And those glasses are too expensive, uncomfortable, and not cost effective. 

Until the glasses are super light weight and free, it's not going to work. 

If Nintendo can do it's handheld 3D without glasses, then I want my 3D TV without glasses too.  Maybe this is Nintendo's opportunity to take some of Sony's HDTV market share...

Everyone has legitimate points here.  I strongly oppose 3D gaming as well.  Even 3D in the movie theater is a scheme too because most, if not all, of these "3D" movies are filmed in 2D, then edited with effects to make things jump out in 3D.

I would invest in a 3D TV but there are two things holding me back: 1) the lack of 3D that exists at the moment and 2) the fact that I cannot see 3D on any of the televisions that exist to date!  I have two eyes that do not function simultaneously and even though I can see 3D in theaters (Coraline, Avatar, etc etc) I have yet to see a 3D TV produce the same output.  As more films port their way over to 3D blu-ray and the technology advances I'd have no problem spending the money, but until everything is working properly I just can't see the benefit. 

As for the last comment (#72 in case someone else posts) with the exception of avatar almost all of the 3D films were shot in 2D with 3D effects added later with the exception of animated films.  That said most of the films coming out now are natively 3D (Step Up 3D (yak) RE4, Saw 7) with very few being used as converted gimmicks. 

I recently bought a 3DTV bundle.  I got a Samsung 46 inch, with a 3D bluray player, 2 glasses, Monsters vs Aliens 3D and an Xbox Elite (you have to have HDMI to play 3D games so you HAVE to get an Xbox Elite or newer) for 1800. 

So far, 3D is very hit and miss.  The Monsters vs Aliens 3D bluray works great, but things like the 3D DirecTV channels are sometimes cool, sometimes terrible.  And the shows on there that aren't formatted properly cause a lot of eye strain.  Upconverting normal TV to 3D is a total crap shoot.  Sometimes you don't notice it at all, sometimes it adds a bit of depth but it's not really worth wearing the glasses for.  The best upconversions are movies that were originally made to be 3D. I've tried to upconvert some games with little luck.  The best one was Guitar Hero 5 as it added a LOT of depth to it and the note track floated out a bit.  The only "true" 3D game I have is that Invincible Tiger arcade game.  After about a HOUR of fighting it I finally got it set up to work right and it wasn't worth it.  Didn't work well at all and took out a lot of the color which this kind of 3D should NOT do.  But it's hard to judge it on that game as I'm sure the 3D thing was just slapped on to try to sucker people into buying a terrible game. 

The thing is, the TV is amazing.  I had an HDTV already, and going from that HDTV to this 3DTV is like going from SDTV to HDTV all over again.  The picture is so clear that it is almost distracting and even without glasses everything looks pretty 3D-ish and has all kinds of depth that I've never seen on any TV before.  And to me, that is why upconversion is so useless.  I've already got more depth than I've ever seen before, putting on the glasses and turning on the 3D is pointless. 

So all in all, I'm not totally sold on 3D. I didn't really think it would take over the world before I bought one (honestly I was VERY anti-3DTV, I only bought this because it was a great deal, getting the bluray and xbox, etc) and nothing has changed my mind after buying one.  They have to do a lot more work on it before there is a verdict on it.  Glasses have to come down in price, glasses need to be made universal, everything needs to be formatted the same way, etc.  But I will NEVER regret buying this 3DTV because even if I never turn 3D on again, the TV is jaw dropping and one of the most satisfying pieces of technology I've ever owned. 

Maybe I'm not with the majority of people, but I'm not that impressed by 3D in cinema's either...

How many times can the same cheesy concept be used...

Horror movies - oh let me guess something is going to fly at me to try to be scary -- usually just weakens the moment of the story in order to get the cheap reaction -- even worse if like me you don't waste your time with the 3D and saying what did that have to do with anything when watching it in 2D oh that's right... cheap reactions...

In animated movies with 3D I feel like it's the same thing... oh let's change the script so this can be done to get a specific reaction... OK great, you managed to change the entire flow of the film to get that one scene to work...

So what now games want to go that route? 

Oh how exciting I was getting lost in the game, until wait for it... oh yeah, the same scene as the last however many 3D games trying for the same reaction...

My only hope is that the 3D games continue to offer 2D versions (hopefully without the gimicky scenes for 3D effects) when they release... otherwise, there will be a lot of games out there that I no longer have interest in playing...

That's a great point.  So often 3D is just used for stupid out of place shock value rather than to add any depth or improvement to the film.  Even if it wasn't physically annoying for me it still just seems pointless to me until its really used to improve the overall production rather than an awkward forced scene here and there. 

If they can make 3D that doen't require glasses i wouldn't mind it, because some people already where glasses meaning you would have to put them over your glasses which would be very annoying.  Also why do they think everyone will have 3D TVs?  there like $1000 at the least. 

I think 3D has the potential to be big if they made movies/games in a way that the 3D felt more real.  I have seen a few movies in 3D such as Toy Story, Bolt, The Last Airbender and Shrek.  And every single time it didn't really feel like anything more than just a little bit of depth perception.  Nothing ever really popped out enough for me to go "wow".  And being a person who already wears normal glasses to see at all to begin with, it's not very comfortable having 2 pairs sitting on my nose. 

why the hell dont they just instal an overlay on the front of the tv so you can watch 3d without the glasses?it cant be that hard. I already have to wear normal glasses and putting anything over them is a real hassle. 

I couldn't bothered to read this but I did want to make a comment.  3d gaming is already on the market with Samsung TV's as they upscale from 2d to 3d which I have seen and is pretty mint.  as for full 3d (I dunno if this has been mentioned) but Batman AA on the PS3 was 3d ready for full 3d as the PS3 has the HDMI port 1.3 which is the minimum requirement for Full 3d.  Xbox 360 only has a 1.1 so we will have to wait until next console to get Full 3d out of our xbox games.  As for Glasses free 3d that is in research with Panasonic ;)

I think all this 3D bollocks is a lot of shit.  When HD TV came onto the scene everyone was loving it, more detailed movies, TV channels and games!  but 3D has way too many cons to it, only pro of 3D is that its cool, for 30 minutes, then its boring.  Notice how most 3D movies and games always try and make objects fly towards the screen, and its really noticable, so rather than just watching a movie that you can feel part of, its more like watching a panto and getting stuff thrown at you, BORING!  i think the best next step in tech would be even higher defination TV's, faster frame rates, or basically ANYTHING else.  Wouldnt mind a TV that was like that thing in star wars, ya know where a screen appears from R2D2, now that would be something i'd buy

@#87 - Obviously, not reading the article has put you at a disadvantage, because that's not what the article was about or even what anyone in the comments was talking about.  Kudos for that great idea though. 

Great article :-) And I agree 100%.  My wife and I are happy w/our current hd tv.  I'm happy w/it for gaming.  And she could care less, she enjoys playing New Super Mario Bros. Wii on the standard tv in the other room....I've seen 3D and nothing special to me.  Heck, I haven't even upgraded my regular dvds to Blu Ray since I don't have that player yet.  Waaay to much money to upgrade that.  And then to upgrade all that HD to 3D along with a new tv?!?!?!  Uh no.  I'm happy with what I got.  The hype can suck it.  I don't need 3D. Neither does my wife.  Oh and she HATES wearing the 3D glasses

I Went to a store a 4 months ago that HAd Batman Arkham Asylum on PC with Some kind of 3d Glasses set-up though I Enjoyed it & it was a cool experience, it's not really something I want to hassle with for all my games, or really any of them.  It was nice to try it once. 

Like every movie today is advertised 3D or XD-3D and I Saw Despicable Me in 3D and I Dont think the movie was specifically made with 3D in Mind since it didnt seem to Pop out at me all that much.  The Trailer for Cats & Dogs 3D before the Despicable Me started was however pretty cool. 

but $12 Dollars and having to go to the Earliest (and cheapest) Show is really not worth it, I'm more of a Night Time Movie Person, so when I go Home the Movie sort of finishes off the day.  I Think 2D will always be the Standard because you get the experience (whether its a game or a movie) for a BETTER, Cheaper price, and you dont have to wear those damn Glasses! 

Most people dont have HD yet, me for one and I still wait to see the reall benefit of it, granted its better, but for me Id rather have more games and the sports channels :) 3D is kl but as the article says not a game changer.  Maybe on arcade titles or kinect titles it could work? 

3D could potentially be utilized to make very immersive gaming experiences.  The problems mainly lie is the glasses and image quality.  I think Nintendo is going the right direction by putting 3D on a handheld eliminating both of these factors.  3D on big screen TVs was released before the technology was perfected in order to follow up the Avatar 3D craze, it will be a good number of years before a true 3D experience is put to the market. 

Although I have not played any games in 3D yet, my sentiments echo the points brought up in this article exactly.  I wear glasses, and will certainly not be moving to contacts any time soon.  Experiencing the discomfort I have felt for two to three hours in a movie theater by wearing 3D glasses over my glasses is not something I want to recreate in my home for an even longer period of time. 

I say 3D gaming is a fad until the technology allows us to experience it without the need for glasses in the home.  I am very intrigued by the Nintendo 3DS for this reason, although that technology is still meant to be experienced by one person at a time. 

@#95: 4D technology does not, and will not, exist.  Maybe you mean holographic or something, but we live in a three dimensional world, not four dimensional.  It is physically impossible to get to the "fourth dimension." 

I like 3D for watching movies like How To Train Your Dragon but for video games I don't think I'm sold on the idea yet.  I need that "WOW" factor for a game like when I saw the movie I mentioned earlier, then I'll probably be sold.  It'll probablty be a differntly experience for a game than a movie, but that's just a guess.  I think as of now I think 3D work for movies. 

I can only watch about 30 minutes of 3D on one of those TVs.  However on the cinema I don't have any ill effects.  If they could somehow make that possible for the 3D TV and their was a major drop in price and it had the jaw dropping beauty that HD had then and only then will i even consider getting one and also it would be preferable to get rid of the glasses.  Then it would be a decent TV for me. 

It's the same argument as 3D movies.  Yes, SOMETIMES it can be good (How to Train Your Dragon, Toy Story 3D) but the majority of the time it's pointless and actually detracts from the experience because you either get a headache or can't see stuff properly.  And it'll be exactly the same for games.  Just because the technology is there, it doesn't mean it's good enough to go mainstream yet. 

And what about those of us that HAVE to wear glasses?  Do big corporations really expect us to buy a 3D TV even though we'll either have to start using contacts or just suffer through not being able to even see what's going on?  Well they're sadly, sadly mistaken. 

I have no doubt 3D will go mainstream at some point in the future, just as HD did.  But the technology simply isn't good enough yet. 

@102 - Webb, I'm probably going to get a 3D TV soon enough, just in case I want the OPTION to use it.  I can't help it, I'm just one of those guys looking for next newest peripherals.  I'm pretty much the target audience here, always buying a new rockband/guitar hero guitar bundle to have the newest and hopefully better toys.  Doesn't matter, I bought a microsoft racing wheel when I had like 2 racing games, JUST IN CASE I felt like using it. 

I'm a technowhore, and it cannot be stopped, but that doesn't mean that I don't have a sense of reason.  I mean, if it's new and cool I'm probably gonna have one eventually, with the exception of KINECT.  I need to see some WAY better application and software until I buy that thing.  Someone needs to tell these developers that not EVERYTHING with flashing lights and patterns and shit is "awesome", just cause you can wave your fuckin hands at it and jump around like an asshole in your living room. 

What bothers me is it seems like they make stuff in 3D these days just for the sake of it.  Avatar was fantastic in 3D, but the effort was also put in.  I saw Clash of the Titans in 3D and it wasnt even noticable or cool until they end with the Kraken.  So it seems to me it will be the same with gaming.  But you'll never get me watchin 3D in my living room anyway.  Its fun on a gigantic screen in the theater, its just a gimmick at home. 

I personally hate Blu Ray and 3D. I don't see anything wrong with regular DVD especially since they are like 10 to 15 bucks cheaper than Blu Ray's.  3D sucks cause of the glasses just like everyone else says.  I will never buy a Blu Ray player nor a 3D t.v.  I already have a 42" Vizio 1080p that works just fine and damn well good for my viewing experience.  3D games are just a stupid idea just like motion control games.  I like to sit and play my games in a relaxing manner with no glasses or waiving my damn body around. 

Some replies to a few things I've seen in the comments since my last post...

1.  The Xbox IS fully capable of doing 3D games as long as you have an HDMI enabled console.  The only difference between it's capabilities and the PS3's is that when you put a 3D game in the PS3, the TV will automatically recognize the signal and go into 3D mode.  When you put one in the 360 you have to manually tell the TV that it's 3D by hitting the 3D button on the remote.  That's all. 

2 - Glassless 3D is not just being developed, it's already in use in other countries.  They even have it on cell phones in Japan.  But since our economy is based on consuming we have to all buy 3DTVs with glasses and THEN they'll let us have the newer kind. 

3 - Most of the home 3D glasses are created to be able to go over top of your normal glasses so you don't to not wear glasses or get contacts.  I've had people look at mine who wear glasses and they've slipped the 3D glasses over top of their glasses with no problem or discomfort.  And from their reaction the 3D effect apparently works better for them so maybe I need glasses myself. 

4 - The debate over things popping out of the screen or not.  This 3D is not about that.  That kind of non-sense is exactly why 3D was always a fad every other time it came around.  The reason Avatar was such a success is because it did NOT go for that corny flying at you gag.  It's about adding depth, it's about immersing you into the world of whatever you're watching, not about sending fake eye balls flying out of the screen. 

5 - Do we want 3DTV or not?  I don't really think we have any choice in the matter.  3DTV IS going to be shoved on us over the next few years.  And it's not about creative reasons or making TV better.  It's about piracy.  Why did the studios choose Bluray over HD-DVD?  They though Bluray was harder to bootleg.  Same thing with 3D. If they can get every theater changed over to 3D, nobody can video tape the screen to make bootlegs anymore.  And at home you can't copy 3D movies and compress them to AVI or whatever without destroying the 3D effect and making them unwatchable.  You can copy them but since you can't compress them the file size is gigantic.  With more and more ISPs using bandwith caps, people aren't going to waste their bandwith uploading and downloading TV shows and movies that are several gigs each. 

as long as glasses go over my own glasses, it's ok, because i don't want to play half-blinded, but not so much into 3D gaming, if would be nice to see one, but no way i would buy new TV just to play 3D games

It simply is the price thing.  We as consumers are constantly playing catch up to the current technology.  Many of the people I know (including me) still haven't managed to make the transition to HD yet.  After all there's all them pesky important things in my life that need money spending on them first.  Like food, bills, replacement items around the home etc.  Really how pretty my TV picture is, isn't really my number one priority.  Of course HD provides a better experience and I'm sure that if everyone could trade in there SD tv's for HD they would do, unfortunately that's just not going to happen.  If companies really want to see a 3D tv in every home by even 2014 they need to start some sort of free TV exchange service.  Otherwise the only people who'll own one by then are the same rich mindless folk who always manage to buy the latest gadget the moment it hit's the shelves.  You know them same guys running around bragging about exactly how much better their HD is than your TV.  Or as they're more commonly known, Wankers. 

@1 and alot of others, i agree only thing i get with 3D is a migrain and think this current everything MUST BE 3D is a gimmic that will hopefully vanish.. like it did about 15years ago.. along with VR..

also glasses.. cant wear them with my glasses for long periods of time there uncomfortable etc

for once MS seems to be the sensible party taking the wait and see method with a healthy dose of reality check.. IE people are to smart to buy into a gimmic..

I for one won't be buying a 3D tv, and not just because I'd have to wear the dumb glasses all the time. 

I find that 3D effects just look cheap, almost like cardboard cut-outs stacked in layers or something.  It's fine for cinema (though the cinema's around here charge $3.00 more to get the stupid glasses and you aren't allowed to bring your own). 

Until 3D-TV means its like something out of a sci-fi flick where its fully holographic and I'm sitting in the middle of it or something I'm not going to be impressed. 

I think 3D will not last!!  really have you noticed that 95% of the movies that have come out in 3D are for little kids.  I don't think that I have seen a movie that I would like to see in 3D. Even if there was one I wouldn't go see it movies are supposed to be fun to watch not leave feeling nauseous and having a headache.  Gaming in 3D will only make this worse. 

sony is stupid.  I know many people who just now bought their first HDTV.  Not to mention we are still no in a place where all programming is in High Def.  They just want to start selling the next expensive and price inflated thing as quickly as possible. 

I just don't think it is worth the hassle to go out to buy a new TV (that is a lot more expensive than a regular HD TV), buying a game supported on 3D (which, will probably cost more because idiots at Sony will jack up the price to capitalize on the recent craze brought on by Avatar that every single movie is now copying, especially if the series ended with 2 so the new sequel can use "3D" in the title like "Step it Up 3D" and "Toy Story 3D") and wear uncomfortable glasses to play a game that gives you headaches after an hour or two just to see you favorite game in half the graphical settings with noticeable "lag" so you enjoy the occasional thing "fly out of the screen." 

Movies in 3D SUCK.  Has nobody besides me noticed this?  Yeah, it's neat-o the first time you manage to make out what the crap it is your staring at, 'til you realize that it's infinitely easier to watch the movie with the lame glasses where they should be; on the sticky, disgusting movie theatre floor. 

If the furthest 3D games go is "your character's got a nifty emboss around him!  You paid six grand for that picture!  you're a champ!"  and you're wearing those lame glasses, I don't see myself owning a 3DTV.  Ever. 

simple fact is no-one is gonna buy it while there is still 2 or 3 different types of 3D tech out there.  Lets face it look at how people were sitting on the fence until HD-DVD folded its unbelievable to think that they started this again... I know people who just waited to see which took off the simple fact is that will stop people buying into the tech. 

I mean can you imagine if you opted for a 3D-TV and the found out that you couldn't get the movie you wanted in 3D on your TV its just stupid possibly worse than the format war.  At least if you invested in a HD-TV and you backed the wrong horse there it was just a new player and you were back in the game and you could keep your old player and films. 

If they don't make it 1 standard they will kill it before they get started, having said that I have no interest in 3D at home its OK in the cinema but my LED TV is all I need for gaming and movies at home Avatar looks perfectly good enough and simply if it was 3D I think I would just get seriously motion sick.  So 3D is in my book going nowhere fast. 

I find 3D to be really over rated and like most people have said above 'Discomfort issues'.  If you look back in history 3D has been around for i think at least 50 Years and every now and then 3D has its bloom but for some reason *COUGH* SONY *COUGH* have decided to kill it by trying to inforce 3DTV'S and other companies are following them like sheep.  Its all about money at the end of the day.  I myself get easyily sucked into the latest gadget but with 3D i feel distanced.  I dont watch many 3D films if at all and whats wrong with conventional HD nothing at all 3D needs to be introduced slowly not like BAM FUCKING BAM BUY THIS AND YOULL RECIVE A RECEPT TO FUCK ALL! 

1.  Because wearing funky glasses just makes you look like an idiot the only reason I do it in the cinema is because everyone else looks like a moron and its in the dark

2.  Buying a new TV just for a game seems just pointless as they are really expensive maybe when the price of TV goes down because of loads of 3D movies coming out it will appeal more but right now they really need to find a different way instead of glasses maybe a screen over the TV? 

seems to me the only real reason nobody wants one is the expense...i for one am getting one on December, whether or not games suck or rock in 3d. *** THIS IS NOT A FAD!!!!******  get used to 3d this time, as it is here to stay, and in 5 years you're gonna look back and wonder how you live without it.also pretty soon afterwards it will be a holoroom kinda like on jason x, but regardless you should just stop complaining about it, and if you dont even have an HDTV yet, eventually your set will break and a nice 3DTV will be about as muck as any other, so there...

Until it projects an image directly into my living room or is similar to JARVIS from the Iron Man films I'm not interested.  Didn't work 10 years ago, and I can't see it working now either.  And what's wrong with gaming as it is now? 

Well said as always, Webb!  The adoption rate for the sets is a huge question mark (leaning towards "not happening")in the absence of a "killer app".  Even the slack-jawed yokels of the world will realize that 3D television sets are not the next big thing... And the technology behind REAL walk-around-the-game-cause-it's-coming-from-the-hologram-projector-on-the-floor won't be reasonably affordable during this console cycle.  From the perspective of a 25-year gamer who lives and breathes this stuff, all I hear from Sony is "You need this, buy it" (and sometimes they are damn right).  Whilst the guys over at Microsoft are ASKING the gamers what we want, tracking down that shit and putting in work orders. 

3D movies are so stupid, ever since Avatar did it.  I don't see movies in 3D anymore and I plan not to see any of them if I can help it.  When it comes to games I hope they never switch fully over to 3D as I enjoy wearing my normal glasses and not two at a time.  If they created a 3D experience that didn't require glasses then maybe. 

Two more lil things since I hardly ever post anymore, you owe me this ;) 1) READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE before you allow yourself to form a senseless thought about it.  Next, READ WHAT ALL OF THE OTHER FUCKERS HAVE SAID before you bother "filling us in" on your brilliant ideas.  There are about 15 posts here that add something to the conversation FOR FUCK'S SAKE and... never mind.  2) Webb, I know you know this already but a friendly reminder is in order: You are the man!  You follow your followers' followings and always handle things with the magic touch.  I hope (and assume) that amongst your followers are those who continuously foster your well-being and continued success. ( please forgive the intrusion, I learned netiquitte in Kentucky)

I'm interested in 3D if it can help with depth of field in certain games, or creating a deeper image.  When I play CoD, Battlefield, etc.  I have trouble making out shapes at distance (is that a bush, or a RPD-equipped, Soviet soldier?),  if 3D's "enhancement" of picture can make it easier to discern objects at range, I'm interested, but until more media jumps on the bandwagon I'm not willing to buy a new TV (I couldn't afford it if I wanted to anyways). 

Why are all of these Companies making their products 3D, as you can see pretty much every comment above me was anti-3D, If they make a 3d xbox, and all of the new xbox games would only be avalible in 3d... I'll give up on gaming.  So in conclusion i dont care if they make it 3d, But if theres no 2d alternative, Its gone personal. 

it's all just a choice people, 3D is here to stay whether u like it or not.  Theres just too much of a market for it.  3D will be a standard in all TV's once the glasses are removed and remember that these TV's play 3D and 2D so just choose what u want to watch in 3D.

No big deal really once the prices come down which aren't really that high anyway. 

i can barely stand the 3D of everyday life... I watched some of the world cup in 3D... didn't change the content or outcome and made my wife puke... that being said, I predict that most people on this site will have a 3d tv within 3yrs (you're not going to have a choice... its gonna be included in most next-gen and higher-end tvs)

I never enjoyed a 3D movie and I would not enjoy 3D gaming.  If the next generation game consoles are ones that are majority of 3D games I will be sticking with my xbox360.  I am currently happy with the current gaming generation and I think it is best if they just work on improving what is already out there rather than trying to create a new style of gaming. 

No 3D here and whoever baught a 3D tv and dosnt have glass's ur an idiot and what a waste of money those tv's and equipment is.  The day gameing makes a big step in 3d to make most the market 3d is the day I quit gaming

I've really got in to HD gaming over the last year or so and think it adds so much to the experience, but 3D needs to stay in the cinema.  Unless you have a TV that takes up an entire wall in your living room it will never have the same impact.  Cant companines just focus on really pushing the limits of what we have before we move on to new technology? 

yeah i just dont a) wanna splash out on a new tv when my current one works, and b) feel that gaming needs this step.  HD makes every game look stunning and personally i dont think it needs anything else.  it is like kinect, i enjoy sitting on my sofa and not having a work out as i play.  3D will not add enough to gaming to be worth it! 

I don't like the 3D films in the cinema as it doesnt make you go wow look at that or anything for the extra price and the glasses are just so uncomfortable.  So it'll take a while before 3D gaming will ever really take off.  perhaps when the technology come into place for glasses free 3D then I might be tempted. 

3D sounds interesting but overall it is going to end up being a risk.  Just as the wii did with full motion controls, the next consoles will be the pioneers to bring this tech into the mainstream world.  As for my opinion i support 3D because it will further enhance gamer's interactions with the games. 

Just imagine how much big companies like Fony pay market researchers to arrive at conclusions like every home will be 3DTV enabled by 2010. 

I have a tip in money saving in these hard economic times for corporation big wigs. 

Join a website that your target demographic surfs (maybe one not dissilmilar to this).  By virtue of the fact that these people, or consumers as you might refer to us, contribute to the forums of said website, would suggest that they are core/avid gamers. 

Having done so, pose the question to which you feel you have the solution, maybe something like 'whadda you guys think of 3D in gaming?' 

Then it's just a matter of sitting back and letting your opiniated target audience give you the full low down on what they think about it and, more often than not, where their gaming propensities lie. 

In this case, in all but 5 or so instances from 180 comments, 3D in gaming is not what is wanted.  So, stop telling your customers what they want, it only serves in driving them away. 

Yeah I got a bad feeling 3D is here to stay.  With they way it is being pushed it is about the same when DVD's were released and they told us we had to buy all our movies again.  For use people that wear glasses it just sucks in my opinion, put on another pair of glasses over the ones we already have on, that sounds just awesome(note the sarcasm).  Watching movies like Avatar or others isn't horrible but just still feels like a gimick but I can handle movies more then gaming.  If I had to wear those glasses for a intense 6 hour session of CoD or something, I think my eyes would go cross eyed and I would develop a severe migraine.  I could see how it would be cool but the amount of people that get headaches and get sick from 3D seems a little alarming. 

I have only had a few experiences with 3D, my most recent, and last, was with Avatar 3D. Don't get me wrong, I loved Avatar; I thought the 3D in it really made a movie that would have been fairly average in most respects, "pop".  It's just that after the movie I was really dizzy and had a nasty headache, and from then on I vowed never to use 3D again. 

I'd rather spend my hard earned money on better games.  If I were to replace my HDTV or get a new one, I'd rather buy the new HDLED televisions.  3D will have its place in a few more years, I dont see it going mainstream anytime soon.  Though it does amaze me that there are several people that dont own an HDTV yet.  I got my first HDTV which was a Samsung tube back in 2004 and I was a broke college student/bartender. 

When they can do 3D without messing up the colours, dropping the resolution, Giving the observer headaches, Preventing my often 13 hour sittings, preventing my occasional 48 hour sittings, trying to sell separately expensive active glasses technology, or even just plain annoying passive glasses, & give 180 degree lenses instead of just what's directly in front of your eyeballs, because I for one don't spend all my time staring straight at the screen's middle, Then the only obstacle might be the price point of the technology.  All those predictions of £D in every home are just plain off in lala land.  Do they realise that there isn't even HD in every home yet?  I would love to say for certain that this tech will just die out, but... I often see muppets with too much money and no ability to think for themselves go into stores and just believe every word the sales people tell them.  Those same muppets also seem to think that buying everything makes them Gamers.  Whereas I like to think that just makes them people that play games, and that Gamers with a capital 'G' think for themselves, and know when not to buy.  So for the reason of the uninformed gullible consumer, 3D will still sell product.  After all Gamers are still the minority. 

I have recently bought a Samsung 3DTV, to be honest I only bought a 3DTV as I got a good deal and was looking to upgrade from my old 36" CRT anyway.  I have two pairs of 3D shutter glasses that I got for free, one pair with the TV and one pair by free redemption from Samsung so that wasn't too bad.  I have tried out 3D gaming first hand on Avatar which is a true 3D game.  Once I had it set up correctly I was surprised how good the 3D was and actually brought the game to life (bearing in mind we are talking about Avatar after all!!)  I have only played the game for about three hours at once whilst wearing the glasses and have to admit they do begin to get uncomfortable but im sure the design of the glasses will be improved over time so that they begin to become more comfortable.  For short periods they are OK, i.e. the length of a normal movie which is predominantly what most people will buy a 3DTV for. 

I have also used the built in feature on the TV which can convert a 2D signal into a 3D signal and tried this on Modern Warfare 2.  The TV did a decent job of creating a 3D feel to the game but I actually found it quite difficult to play and much prefer a standard 2D crisp HD picture. 

For me its a gimmicky toy to try out and only really invested in a 3DTV to future proof myself should 3D gaming eventually take off.  But for now I can say that I am happy just to play with a crisp 2D HD picture and save the 3D for movies!! 

So many people who have commented as so anti 3D gaming but how many have actually tried it?  Or are just basing their hatred for 3D gaming on what they have read?  I think if a decent 3D game came along and people tried it they may not be so quick to slate the technology? 

To be honest I agree with the article 100%.  My favorite part of these articles is that it reads as if it were a discussion between more than one person, but what REALLY took my attention on this one is the sense of frustration on the writer saying “but I don’t want it”.  LOL It's true, they just want to push this crap and make you buy it because they say its AWESOME!  And they'll try, but one should remember or if you are young you should do research. 

I'm old school, and I have tweaked and played many PC games in 3D just for fun.  Even games that were not made to be played in 3D & one thing I can say is “It was fun” that's it.  HD TVs made an impact in gaming because of the same reason it did for YEARS before on PC.  You had the hardware but now you needed a screen that would allow you to see the graphics you were missing, and then it was said “let there be the light of plasma for the living room too”.  Now Sony as a company that failed so many times with there latest console project, is looking to have something unique like the Blue, to make money from everyone with this 3D stuff. 

First mayor problem with these is that everyone is used to see in 3D resolution not aspect ratio, that’s why a LOT of people can't handle using this glasses for to long (and as gamers we play for to long sometimes), the second and the reason they say “it's in a process” or “we are working on the technology“ is because you loos a big range of your HD resolution on 3D. And third this technology will not serve on many games because of the Lvl of details that the viewer will loose because of the fast pace or colors on it, in other words unlike HD TVs this can't be applied to just any game.  I'm one of those lucky people that think for themselves & I know they are trying to make me pay to mush money for very OLD TECH, thus I take into consideration that I don't need it, I wouldn't use it mush (not even for movies) & most games & movies are going to look better in HD resolution, then my answer is “NO'T interested”. 

i dont care about 3d that much.  my nividia card has 3d on it for the old red and blue glasses that dont cost $200.  sometimes i turn it on and play a game or something, but after 30 minutes i get a sever head ache.  the glasses always fall of and hurt my nose.  no thanks for 3d unless its FREE.  this 3d crap reminds me of kinect

Seriously 3D + Kinect.  Anyone seeing what I'm seeing?  Holographic gaming!  Get them both working together and a game that you can actually walk through and interact with that pops out of your TV.  Neat huh? 

if you can get 3D without those stupid glasses i think has the potential to be awesome, however i like what Nintendo is doing with their new DS that you can turn the 3D effect off which i believe should be an option. 

It will take a while for film developers to make full use of the technology 3D offers.  I have my doubts as to whether or not it will be a success in the home especially if it means a family each have to wear 3D specs.  Maybe 3D TV will be as successful as the BetaMax video days! :) 

I love 3D. Always have.  I taught myself to draw in stereoscopic 3D over ten years ago, and I used to be obsessed with all things 3D. I'm also wealthy enough to buy a 3D TV. 

But I'm not going to until they either get rid of the glasses or make them cheap like the plastic ones they use at MGM Studios.  And it better look as good as my TV now, or better, with the 3D off or no way.  I imagine I would turn the 3D on 10% of the time, anymore would cause headaches. 

All I hope is that 3D will so extremely over saturated the market that people will get over it.  I'm rarely a person to avoid, or dislike any form of new technology, but 3D is a fad.  Motion control will be over after the horrible failures of Move & Konnect on launch (although I see their sales picking up in 3Q 2011).  3D I'm afraid is here to stay in (sometimes ok) film & (sadly) TV, but gaming will eschew this tech like the albatross it is. 

The problem with 3D TV's right now is that many people have just recently bought an HDTV.  I've only had mine for 4 years.  My last tube TV I had for 10 years.  Besides that, I think the best time for 3D TV's will be when the next generation of consoles come out, which might be in 2 to 3 years.  By then, the games won't look like the graphics are being compromised to accommodate 3D and we'll probably have glassless 3D as well. 

I don't see how 3D TV can be good for your health over prolonged periods.  After watching a 3D movie at the cinema I walk out with a headache.  Why would I want to have the same problem after watching 3D TV at home.  Concentrating on gaming may make this experience worse. 

200: It would be nice to see Kinect+real 3d but I doubt that there will be a lot of good games with that tech, we saw what happened with Wii.  You can enjoy some games (and there would be a lot of crappy games), but the bigger ones stay with regular controller. 

210: the first TV's gave headaches too, they need to evolve the tech, a lot of ppl would hate if your living room TV give you headaches. 

Those "expectations" are meant to make the market to think "this will be in every home, I need to buy one" but seriously, how many years took for HD to be the standard.  And what about music CD, DVD and Blu-Ray?  Well, maybe in the US, they adopt the new techs faster.. ...but wait!,  somebody forgot about recession! 

Finally, I haven't played this generation 3D games (but I saw 3D with LCD lens and polarized lens, movies and 3D skull model in the Medicine School, really useful) but as a player, I would be worried if that would mess with my shooting accuracy, and I'm pretty sure that 3D would short my gaming time (headaches, dry eyes, etc) and I wouldn't see enough details to spot a sniper.  BTW it would be nice to see GOW2 Nexus chapters in this generation 3D

I don't see why everyone is so against wearing glasses while watching tv or playing games.  You will get used to it.  It's like someone wearing regular glasses or a wedding ring for the the first time.  Yeah its awkward and weird maybe a little uncomfortable but you will get used to it, like its not even there.  And for the ones that already have glasses, they do make contacts you know.  I think more of deal breaker is for sure the price.  It will have to get alot cheaper before everyone will start buying 3D tvs and games. 

I went to Fry's Electronics last weekend and they had a Sony HDTV on display with the 3D glasses and all and I have to say I would for one get sick of wearing glasses and two would probably end up with a headache after 30 minutes.  I will stick to my normal gaming/movie watching for a long while before considering a 3DTV. 

3D is a gimmick, it may eventually take off but it will be a while.  My wife hates 3D movies, they give her a headache.  I'm not a fan of 3D movies because it's a 2 hour flick with 6 scenes of something flying at you... 2 hour movie with 90 seconds worth of 3D is laughable.  My vision of 3D is where you are actually immersed in the game, with the world around you in 360 degrees.  Gran Turismo, you're in the car and if you physically look on your left, you see a competitor and scenery flying by.  You ram him into the wall and you can look over the back of your couch and see the wreck.  Where Gears of War has you actually crouching behind cover and Dom is crouching behind you, turn around and you reach out and throw him out of the path of incoming fire.  Where God of War has you... etc, etc.  Until 3D technology is more like virtual reality like all of those wonderfully corny movies from back in the day, it's just not for me. 

Also, is everyone supposed to garage sale their perfectly functioning HD TV to go buy a new 3D TV? 

My opinion on this matter is no.  I have no need to watch tv in 3D, nor do I want to play my games in 3D. I think HDTV is as perfect as it gets.  I don't need to watch everything or play everything and have it pop up right into my face.  The 3D experience doesn't do anything for me.  It's alright to go to the movies and see a flick in 3D once in a while, but this 3D movement is rather annoying.  I'm content and VERY happy with my HDTV thank you.  I just feel me and other people will rather be annoyed of seeing everything pop up at us rather then just the way it is.  I also want to know what are the long term effects of this technology taking a solid place in everyday life if this does become a standard in everyday living.  No 3DTV for me. :) 

Well i know G-Force had 3D not sure hoe much though, and Batman: AA GotY had 3D too, as well as Resident Evil 5 on PC.  But lets go back to PS1... Heart of Darkness had a pair of 3D glasses 'For the Finale' so 3D gaming isnt REALLY a massive step forward, depends on the games style for 3D... Dead Rising?  Yes...Maybe.  Halo?  Dont Push it...

I don't think that games should be purely 3D. If they were, I could no longer play games as 3D messes with my eyes.  They should have an "Enable 3D" option in the menu instead so that everyone is happy. 

WTF i bought a 42inch HD Ready TV (My precious) and it's still new and fresh to me.  Nothing wrong with it..i waited long enough saving up money to buy the HD Ready TV.  At the moment i am still happy and comfortable with the HD Ready TV and i'm happy playing HD Gaming.  Now i've heard and seen about 3DTV and the glasses i was like Cool but I just can't afford 3DTV and glasses cos i already got a new 42inch HD Ready TV (Also i just bought a new black Xbox 360) and i doubt i'll buy them.  Sony, we know you want our money and you are obsessed selling new shits why don't YOU stop wasting your time making 3D TVs and glasses so soon after the brand new HD Ready TVs being released in stores and we just paid alot of money on the HD TVs!.  Like we are gonna buy a 3DTV and the glasses costing thousands of Euros/Sterlings/Dollars AGAIN!  You are gonna have to re make 3DTVs and glasses a hundred year later then our grandchildren and great grandchildren will get excited then.  After seeing all the comments on here people posted, i'm like 3DTV and the glasses are not so good then. 

its just retarted that you need to buy a new TV for it AND you need to wear glasses.  Whats the point in that?  >< Lets say you buy a 3D TV.  And a year later they will come with a new 3D TV where you dont need to wear those glasses.  Waste of money imo. 

I wont buy a 3D TV unless they come with some improved technology then what they are coming with. ( 3D from the TV itself instead of wearing glasses, if everyone in the room would be able to see 3D instead of one person.)  And even if the technology would improve i would only buy a 3D tv if my current TV broke.  For me Graphix/3D arent the most important part of my gaming expirience.  Its a nice extra, yes, but if the gameplay/story is totally terrible what good will the graphix/3D do? 

**Well, I always point out that yeah, you don't want to wear the glasses, but you have no problem strapping on a nerdy guitar and playing Guitar Hero** Since when do people need to buy a *guitar hero TV* and have a guitar to be able to play guitar hero?  comon serious, if you start comparing with other games use common sence and dont be plain stupid.  I think the most people their problem with 3D is that they need to buy a new expensive TV PLUS wear stupid glasses with it.  You can get used to the glasses but whats the point of buying a new TV if you need to wear glasses for it and lets not talk about the headaches you can get. 

I would be happy if HD stays for a couple more years and 3D would fail badly

The glassess are flawed, having to buy a completely new TV is flawed, and another point of the 3D idea that is completely flawed is that in order for it to work you are forced to focus on one specific point of interest, and when you atempt to look elsewhere it is blurry or unfocused... well that leaves all that background scenery and all the cool small little details that you would normally get in a good game unused and unoticed.  The whole entire technology doesn't work...

glassesless 3D technology has already been developed but is not expected to be affordable on the market for another 3 yrs(2013).  As for its place in gaming it should have a off switch for those that dont want it. 

Saw Jackass 3D this weekend and it was some of the most fun I've had sitting in a theater.  Those guys are outrageous!!!  I don't think I'd be able to be friends with them with the kind of shit they pull though. 

Fuck 3d.  Plain and simple.  Excuse the language but thats the truth.  I don't watch movies in 3D because its stupid and I won't be playing games in 3D either.  I don't care about it.  Its pointless.  I think borderlands sums it up in their DLC achievement sarcastically titled "ITS SO REALISTIC!"  Hell no it isn't.  Its just stupid and the majority of the gaming community does not want it. 

OT - I think 3d is interesting..interesting enough that I'll pay an extra 2 bucks to see My bloody valentine or Toy Story in 3d over the regular ones, not interesting enough that Im going to 'Naturally progress to a 3d tv' when I love my HDtv already. 

I think the 3d ds would be the only 3d gaming avenue I ever venture down and I doubt I'll even go that far..

I think 3D is a bad idea.  No matter which way, it just doesn't work for me.  For example.  If your playing a shooter, and everything is in 2D, and you get shot and see the bullet flying towards your head.. It takes away from the experience that it's just a video game.  To me, video games are supposed to take you to a place where the things that can never happen, or you don't want to happen in real life, happen.  Like, when playing an RPG, obviously mages, and blazing swords of fire aren't real, and never will be.  Just like if playing a shooter.. You don't really wanna get shot at.  It's supposed to be a "world" where the unrealistic things, can become a reality.  Now lets say that the 3D aspect was always constant.  Playing a shooter where you can see every bullet fly by, and see every grenade by your feet, and see the dirt and dust flying around you when it blows up may sound really cool.  But like I said.. That takes away from the experience.  To me, That makes it too realistic.  Not to mention the fact that some people will completely freak out when playing a game like this.  Such as little kids that can't buy the game because it's rated M. But play it anyways because their brother or sister or parents buy it for them anyways.  And to me, that just sounds like one big law suit waiting to happen.  For me, 3D will be something that I will never buy.  No matter what, there are just too many problems for me. 

I just don't understand 3D and why it has suddenly been forced on us?  I mean yeah every once in a while at the cinema it's great but everyday?  I mean it does give most people a headache after a short period fo watching, so are we going to have another technology diagnosed condition like wii-itis maybe could be called 3d- itis

I really wish tech higher ups would read stuff like this.  Their are so many comments people have made that I agree with.  But one that stands out.  Leave me alone with this 3D Garbage!  Enough already, I do NOT want to watch movies in 3d let alone play a game in it. 

Seeing that I am blind in my right eye (excuse the pun) I am unable to see anything in 3d because of a little thing I lack: depth perception.  And before you close one of your eyes thinking its the same thing as being blind I can tell no it is not.  How do I know this?  I was once able to see through both eyes.  Whats my point in all of this?  I tried on 3d glasses many times before and each kind has no effect.  People w/o two working eyes seenothing but a darker tint. 

I don't go for the whole "3D" gimmick.  Just "smoke" and "mirrors" to me.  i've goofed with plenty of 3D style things and honestly, screw em.  I watched "up" in 3d.  about 5 mins into the file I took the shades off and was 10x better.  Honestly I don't see the hype of HD either except for cleaner lines, but that's on a seprate topic.  Look.. If I want 3D, gimi a pissing Hologram I can interact with. 

i wont get a 3d telly till about 2014 plus and not willing to pay more than £600 pounds as ive spent around £3000 on tvs in only 3 to 4 years had enough of forking out so much money on technology just cant afford it anymore thats not even include pc laptop 4 xbox 360 becaus eof rrd ps 3 psp x2 ds and more

@258 - I've played Black Ops in 3D yes, it works really well.  The graphics are identical to the 2D version but it just has obvious depth.  The gun is near you, as is the HUD, everything else is further inside the TV.  It's also a bit darker overall, less vibrant colour-wise.  I don't know where people get this "3D versions of games look worse" from, it was the same in terms of raw detail to the eye

Also played Motorstorm on the PS3 in 3D, that was neat.  Is all is worth getting a 3DTV for?  No.  It wows at first but after a few mins you're concentrating on the game and playing it the same as you would in 2D!  Will I exchange my HDTV for one?  No.  Will it be viable in a few years, after we have enough actual 3D-specific content?  Maybe...

I just purchased a new TV and refused to go 3D, no matter how much the sales department tried to convince me it is the future.  Future my ass.  3D technology comes around every 10 to 15 years and never last.  I remember seeing Jaws 3D in the late eighty's and the technology hasn't advance much since.  3D gives a less quality picture due to ghosting and double images.  Also forget about laying back to watch Blueray or to game in 3D because it will affect your picture quality.  Check out Consumer Reports testing 3D televisions and eguipment.  After hours of research I chose to avoid the 3D hype and opted for tried and true 1080p 120hz non-3D.

Once again, this entire page is filled with a bunch of broke clowns who don't even own a 3D TV, can't afford 3D and put it down.  I was one of the early adopters back in June of 2010 and the experience of 3D gaming is amazing.  Fire up Call of Duty Black OPS or Gran Turismo 5 in 3D and see what happens.  Just because you can't afford something doesnt mean you should put it down.  The movie side of 3D is also well worth it as i enjoyed watching movies such as Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs and Monster House much more in 3D than i did on regular Blu Ray.  My advice to all the people criticizing 3D, go out, get yourself a real job and step up to the big leagues instead of holding onto your crusty 5 or 6 year old Plasma and crying like a little girl about how much 3D sucks. 

@261 Happy for you pulling an Amazing Kreskin on your early 3D technology purchase.  Sad how you refer to 3D being "the big leagues" when it's relatively inexpensive.  Were you the same fool bragging how great and how much you spent on technologies such as laserdisc, HD-DVD, minidisc and betamax?  All dead formats and soon 3D will follow.  You can only watch so many cartoons and computer generated films but, the maturity you showed in your post I'm sure that's all you have in your Netflix queue.  My advice is do everyone a favor and kill yourself and your belief that money is the motivating factor why the majority of people dislike 3D. Thanks for the advice Dr Phil but it's not needed because I'm sure I could buy and sell your condescending ass. 

To be honest, I just got my 55 inch 3D Bravia.  IMO, I'd stick with just your HD.  Games like Crysis 2, Mortal Kombat and SOCOM all look amazing in HD, and the 3D really doesn't add much to the experience (if anything, a little bit of depth and some accompanying nausea).  To me, 3D at home was a completely different experience to 3D in a cinema.