I can understand if it's only about stationary consoles.

the 3DS on the other hand  is a completely different matter.

Microsoft isn't invested into 3D as of yet. This is only taken from one interview. In another article featured on IGN, Microsoft's Aaron Greenberg says they are wating for when it'll be more accessible, and adopted in households. As for now, it's not profitable for a CONSOLE to promote 3D gaming when only a handful of people will even care, more much have the tech to play games in 3D.

Crysis has only been demoed on Xbox 360, and was shown in 3D on the Xbox 360, so Microsoft hasn't completely denounced 3D, or the ablity to play in 3D on Xbox 360 (James Cameron's Avatar: The Game). They simply won't be pushing 3D anytime soon.

Source:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/109/1095750p1.html

He's right that huge 3D TVs are way too expensive right now.

But the "future" he's talking about is actually going to be very soon. I expect that sales of 3D capable TVs will surpass sales of "2D only"-TVs already within the next 2 years.

The reason is that for the manufacturers, the extra costs for producing a 3D capable TV with shutter glasses instead of a normal 2D TV are next to zero as long as the panel supports at least 120Hz. The current prices are just ridiculous of course - they want to cash in some money from the early adopters who don't care about the money at all, but prices will drop massively very soon. And who would buy a 2D only TV if the same TV with 3D capability was only let's say $20-30 more?

But of course that doesn't mean 3D TVs will be standard soon. Most people have bought their flatscreen TV not long ago, they won't be buying a new TV soon.

The first response nails it.

lets say what you say about costs is true, we have to look at how the 3DS will affect consumers then.

First as you said many just bought a new tv recently so not going to want to go out and buy a new one right away, and for what?  Avatar and a few video games?  No one will even consider a 3D tv until things like tv shows and sports are in 3D.

But then second has to do with 3DS, if this hits off and gets mass market recognition even, let alone people buy it.  But it will make people think, why buy a 3D tv that I need glasses when sooner or later a tv will have no glasses?

So people will further wait on buying a 3D tv, because they don't want to deal with glasses.

Check this 'hands on'

http://kotaku.com/5564204/hands on-with-seven-nintendo-3ds-games-and-gadgets

It's a given with the tech they're using.  Think about it - two images are being transmitted at a certain angle and your eye has to be in the right 'sweet spot' to get the proper 3D resolution.  Move outside that sweet spot and you're going to get blurring.

Nintendo are fully aware of this which is why there is the slider control to turn 3D off if needed.

I'll be very, very surprised if in reality you can use the 3D in all situations - the sweet spot is almost sure to be narrow enough that if on a bus or train, for example, every now and then you're going to lose the focus point due to movement.

I'm not knocking it - it's very, very cool - but it's not magic.  You can't use that kind of tech and merrily move the screen around as you might otherwise.  You want your eyes and the screen to remain within a fairly narrow 'perfect zone' the whole time you're using the 3D.

I guess they might try and widen the zone of effect - but again I'll be surprised if it's much different than reported in the hands on.

Again though - not knocking.  It is very cool and quite an achievement.  The 3D camera sounds fantastic, too.

they are developing glassless 3d too just in case. :p and with OLED screens yummy

microsoft it probably trying to avoid comparison since their console can't do 3d as easy sony it's doing it.

and only LG panels and certain models will work with it.

the thing about this is, that read it again, it is totally just some person who has only HEARD of how it works.  He clearly hasn't had hands on with it at all.  Post something that is from someone hands on. 

Here is IGN quick on it: Nintendo is using an LCD technology that sends each eye an independent image that the brain merges together, and the effect adds depth. A lot of depth. The effect is immediately obvious, yet seems so natural. And there are multiple sweet spots, so you don't have to awkwardly hold the system in a position that doesn't feel comfortable. If you twist the system you'll get double images and lose the 3D, but it's simple to keep the stereoscopic effect within view.

now i'm not saying that kotaku's worries don't have merit, but using someone who is just like us, speculating and guessing on how somehting works that never seen it is no proof. 

Nintendo gave us a more concrete 3D product with the 3DS. Sony's can be enjoyed whether in 3D or not. Microsoft doesn't create technology to be revered in gaming, so really their opinion means nothing in the matter. When they start making technology then I might be able to take them seriously. Microsoft is a software company. They need to focus on acquiring top notch developers before their investors pull out like they are planning on doing already.

no:

this was not just aimed at Sony:

"Thompson instead backed the experience of Kinect, the company's hands-free motion-control tech, over the 3D experiences offered by rivals."

he's talking about both Sony and Nintendo..