I would look in the mirror before talking. Your post history is nothing to be proud of.

Just a word of advice, if you truly are taking statistics, then don't add bias into the mix.  They dont work well together...

Numbers are numbers, take it for what it is.

every post you write is funnier than the last, first the PSP is "the best multimedia device on the market period", now this?

according to your post the current DS also offers "portable 3d games", i can show you a video of the DS and the iPhone doing what you have mistaken for real 3D if you want

Sort of.

The "Active Shutter" system that is being utilized right now for PC 3D gaming as well as all of the TV companies and PS3 requires either a set top box or a TV with the built-in emmiter to tell the special glasses what to show when.

So, you could take your current HD TV, depending on specs, and buy a ~$200 add on that would need to connect to a PC to run the 3D....

OR you could buy a new "3D Capable" TV and its corresponding glasses for $100-200 for each person to watch 3D movies or connect to a PS3 and play a 3D capapble game, once Sony releases the firmware upgrade to allow the PS3 to handle the 3D parameters.

This is why 3DS is such a big deal. Nintendo has it a little easier in that with the portable system they are not reliant on the TV. So, they have incorporated the better 3D technology that does not require glasses as the part that controls what each eye sees is part of the handheld itself. (i.e. the combination of the camera(s) and the multilayer screens).

Sony is just saying that because they lack the technology to do it themselves. I think we will see head tracking 3D introduced with Natal later this year and Nintendo 3DS also. At which point consumers will be able to pick up a 3D game for 50$ (Natal) or at most 300$ rather then going to the store and purchasing a 3D tv.

Think about it Sony, how big is the market share going to be for 3D PS3 titles, who has 3D TV's? only a few rich men. I myself just got a HD TV and not going to switch right away for 3D. But I'll buy a new 3D handheld for 300$ or pick up Natal and get me some 3D headtracking fun. Why buy a 3D TV?

I think Nintendo's push of 3DS will succeed big time while Sony's 3D TV support will fail at least for another 5 years till consumers care to adopt 3D tv's.

It mainly depends on the pricing of the 3DTV's.

I'm not sure what you mean by head tracking 3D, though.

obviously you have no idea what manners are...and its all relative...what you might think is a big sample size is different then what i might think is a sample size. either way, its no reason for you to call me out with all those insults. I already finished the discussion with the ones i was debating with, read what i said to them, before you go qouting the middle of a convo....all you have shown is that you have no manners when having debates, rather all you can do insult to make yourself look bigger.

This type of argument doesn't fly in statistics.  We can quantify just how accurate the data is for a particular sample size.  For this sample size, the error is ± 2 percent.

I know plenty of grown ups who own a DS, like, a lot, from the ages of well, whatever you classify as a grown up to the 50s or 60s easily, it's just that popular, and I'm not talking about just around my area since I've moved quiet a few times in the past years, that thing is stupid popular to people who play games or are just starting to get into it. 3D on hand held is going to be attractive for sure, I don't think Sony understand the market as well compared to Nintendo as of recent since the brand name is already so strong among hand held, has more power, rumble, motion control, stylus, and has backward DS compatibility.