I don't care about having to wear/buy glasses (I only go to 3D movies in theaters), I just wish Sony and the other TV companies had focused on the Passive system vs the Active Shutter system. This way the additial cost would have been in the TV instead of each pair of glasses.
So, instead of paying $1500 for a TV and $100-$200 per glasses; you'd pay $2000 for the TV and maybe $2 per glasses. Far more reasonable when you consider the number of people and children in an average movie night/sporting party.
Sony is NOT the first to the market in 3D gaming. PC's have been doing it for awhile now. Again, with very expensive glasses. In fact, with PCs you can make any game 3D.
I never said Nintendo pioneered 3D gaming, just that, as usual, Nintendo's solution will become the standard. i.e. a no glasses system.
TVs with no glasses are not coming out to mainstream users for a few years, which is why I bought my $800 Sony TV in February vs a $1500 "3D" TV. I figure I can buy a far better 3D version for $2000 in a few years and save the money now since the Active Shutter system that Sony and others are pushing royally sucks.
I agree on your last point and very well may grab one myself.
Well before either of us gets ahead of ourselves we will need to see exactly how this 3D gaming compares to what is available on PCs and will be available on PS3.
iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.
Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)