Wrong. For consoles it's exactly the same as for PC: 3D display has little to do with game developers because it's a hardware/driver matter.
Traditionally the video driver handles 3D display (because it has to sync the connected glasses).
It may also be handled by a monitor driver (hooking into DirectX).
Even a futuristic monitor (without the need for glasses!) will hook into the graphics data.

This is not a task for a game developer.
It must be implemented by the video/monitor-driver programmers.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoi Danny. Heb niks tegen consoles, hoor. Maar ook voor consoles geld hetzelfde als voor PC.
Het is hardware. Bethesda kan hier ook niks aan veranderen.
Groeten Henk.

Hoi henk
( ik ga nu weer engels praten, dan verstaat de rest het ook)

Sorry, but I still think you are wrong. On console developers still have to manually add extra lines of code for 3D to work, motorstorm: pacific rift, PAIN, and Super stardust HD all received patches that allowed them to be played in 3D, and Black ops had this code on the disk itself on release.
Console don't automatically play games in stereoscopic 3D, otherwise I could've played any game in 3D on my PS3, which certainly is not the case. :confused:

It's probably a case of having to be individually enabled per-game, otherwise the PS3 itself wouldn't have needed an update for it to work. There's also how games not built with 3D in mind can have visual anomalies that, while on PC being able to say "Oh, do it anyway" is allowed, on consoles it is not, so everything must have it specifically enabled.

I really don't care for it. Agree with those above that think that it is mostly just a gimmick :shrug:

I'll skip 3D and wait for holographic displays. What fun is 3D when you are forced to one angle? You still can't move your head and look at the object at different angles.

Actually, if you get up and walk from left to right the perspective does change a bit . But obviously not on the same level as a hologram.

Actually, that is possible, many games have head-tracking support that allows you to do just this. With the release of motion detection systems for the consoles, perhaps this will start to be a standard feature for 3d-capable games.

Don't care would rather have improved effects in general, and larger textures.

Todd Howards reply from the podcast to this question: "Is there any chance that you guys are gonna do Kinect support, Move support, 3D, etc.?"

HELL NO!

I honestly don't see the point in 3D. Make my games as photorealistic as you want, sure, but things like depth of field blurring and depth perception are things I could do without in a virtual world. It's like how HDR in video games has always come off as somewhat awkward, because in real life when you suddenly find yourself looking into the sun you shield your eyes and hardly notice the transition in brightness until afterwards.

Don't want to have to pick through 4-5 different types of glasses to finally get something that works

No thanks. I'm firmly in the "3D is a gimmick" camp and would rather not have it implemented.

3D gaming isn't that great. I've tried it and it's kind've cool at first but when your playing the game for hours, it starts to hurt your eyes. I'd rather not go blind by the time I'm 30.

Plaij red/blue glasses would do the trick...

Because 3D tv and active-glasses are to expensive...

This

Movies in 3D do nothing either.

I haven't played a game in 3D, so I don't know how that is. I have seen a movie recently in 3D, and it was awful--flat pictures sliding in front of other pictures--broke immersion for me big time.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html

Why not? I mean, it can't be TOO difficult or time-consuming to add, can it? I won't have any use for it, but there's no harm in having it available.

i will spend hours on this game and if is 3d my eyes will burn and dye

I hope the PC version is going to work with 3D. If Skyrim is good it's likely going to be the game I'll get 3D for.

I've tested shutter glasses in cinemas and PC games and they've worked fine for me in improving the atmosphere of being in there.


Edit: I voted for "patch later" as the 3D isn't so important.

I really wouldn't care if they added it.

I don't have a 3d tv whatch-a-ma-call-it?
Also I wear glasses and I hate wearing 3d glasses over glasses so even if I did have it I would never use it because it would get annoying and I'd say screw it.

I don't wear glasses, and I hate wearing 3D glasses. The effect really hurts my eyes after just a couple minutes. :banghead:

I don't care if they add it from the standpoint of it being in, in case other people want to use it. I just think that it would be a great waste of time in lieu of other great things that they could be working on.

Stereoscopy 3D is only the good ol' red/blue 3D.
It could be fun.

Thats just because some people need to buy the latest and greatest (and many of the nicest TVs are 3D Capable now). As a whole though, most people hold a negative opinion of 3D... its just the new thing right now that the entertainment industry is trying to force on everyone. So think its really popular right now would be in error, because its really not.