I had a 3D setup at the end of the 90's. Nvidia shutter glasses, pc hooked up to a CRT projector with 72" screen. It was pretty awesome in the beginning. 3D added a lot to Descent 2, it became very easy to dodge the slow moving projectiles. It worked with most 3D games at the time, yet after a month the novelty wore off and I stopped using it altogether a couple months later. The higher resolution and better frame rate of 2D won over the no longer new 3D effect.

Now I'm not all that eager to upgrade again. At the time it only set me back $40 for a set of wired glasses since there was no display lag to compensate for with the old CRT technology. Nowadays you need to buy a new tv or new projector to get the same effect again. Progress :/

If 3D is still around this time when I'm ready to buy a new tv or projector then I'll probably pay a little extra for a good 3D one. It does add to the experience. I really needed 3D in Dark Souls when getting knocked off the ledges in Sen's Castle for the 20th time by misjudging the position of the swinging axes. I imagine it should help in 3D platformers too. I'm never a 100% sure if I'm going to land on or next to the platform I'm aiming for.

Once we get 3D without the glasses on big TV displays and it keeps image quality perfect I'll buy into it. 

Not a fan of 3D for movies in theaters at this point. We'll see if the hobbit can change my mind with it's higher frame rate.
Gaming on the other hand it all depends on the game.

I think it's great. I opt to see a movie in 3d whenever possible. I like the ekstra immersion it brings :P .. Ofcourse, not all 3d movies are great, and some can be downright annoying to see in 3d, but when they get it right, it's awesome !

If anything, 2D should be the one dying eventually rather than 3D. With glasses it's obviously a pain in the ass, but when playing 3DS turning the 3D off simply isn't an option. I see nothing but positive sides of this feature, and I'm looking forward to when all TV's use 3D as default.


You wouldn't remove a dimension in real life, would you? So, why do it with screens?

Avatar blew me out of the water. Yes 3-D is here to stay, will it dominate? Were yet to find out.

I've been a huge 3D fan since I watched my first imax 3D movie and I feel just way more immersed watching a movie in 3D, that's why I always chose the 3D version if a movie I want to see is shot in that aswell.

Currently I'm using a 3D monitor (PS3 compatible) for my home experience, but I'm really waiting for passive 3DTV sets with quad-HD resolution, so that it's not as bloody obvious anymore that the resolution is halved in passive 3D mode.
My monitor obviously is a shutter one and works quite well, but I dislike that it's so dark and that artificial light flickers heavily when seen through the glasses.

Was Killzone 3 in 3D? If so, I may re-purchase that game.

it will take off when we don't need glasses and the picture quality isn't compromised.
3D will be like HDTV. the Elite will buy it when when its cheap everyone will get it (when they need new TVs.
but yes. a massive barrier is glasses.

Anyway, I was able to secure a 42 inch Active 3D HDTV for about $650.  It's pretty sweet (480 hertz, with five HDMI ports, 4 USB 2.0 ports, internet which I don't even use, 3D--of course, Blue Tooth remote which works with my PS3, and a soundbar quality audio system).  Thing is, I didn't know there was such a thing as passive 3D until I already had the active.  Many sites have been doing comparisons and saying that passive 3D is the way to go.  Maybe that's the reason my active 3D set is but a third of the retail price.  Anybody have any personal experience with both?