This has been uttered roughly every 10 years since the late 1950s...and rather like all the "end of the world" cults, eventually one time they're bound to be right.

Don't see it happening this time around though, they've still got the [censored] glasses to contend with. Get technology to do it without those down to reasonable cost and get back to us. Until then- gimmick.

Some quotes from what I linked -
Why 3D doesn't work and never will -



...


This guy knows what he is talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Murch

The problem with this guy is that he was born in 1943, he's nearly 70.

What i mentioned before is the fact that 3D is here to stay, as a springboard for future technologies. ie. 3D holographical images.

3d shouldve just stayed dead.

when we can do it without glasses (like the 3ds) and when theyre mature enough to not throw random crap at the screen to show off (this is mostly for movies, i dont think they do it with games) then we'll talk

Even if they get rid of the glasses the technology will still cause eye strain and induce headaches for precisely the reasons posted by Odd Hermit. I've seen enough 3D movies to know that I could not sustain 3D viewing over extended periods.

I'm all for visual fidelity and improving graphics to the bleeding edge, but 3D is a path which has (on me) a physiological cost - one I am unwilling to repeatedly suffer over the hundreds of hours I expect to play the game. So I personally will never play Skyrim in 3D if someone ever retroactively incorporates support for it, but the best of luck to those who want that experience.

Not every old person is senile and/or stuck in the past. He gives very good reasons for why it won't work and has more than enough experience with digital images to know what he's talking about.

No he doesn't know that much really.


Then don't do movies where items appear as if they are 10 feet from the audience. Everyone that makes 3D should already know that.


I don't believe eyes work like that. The focusing "mechanism" (muscles that change the eye shape I believe) is largely decoupled from the one that configures convergence (muscles that change the direction our eyes point at). Besides, when our eyes focus at an item at around 80 feet away, it gets far enough that it's kinda something at "infinite distance". Meaning that items at 60 feet away or 120 or 1000 are all close to "infinite distance" focus setting. There's very little effort to do to refocus between those items, in fact they are mostly non blurry. Try that : look at an item like at 80 feet away and try to tell me items farther or much farther away are really out of focus. For the same reason, the eyes don't really need to make movements to change convergence for items that far away because the change would be very very small. In fact our eyes are always moving even when we focus on some item, very small short movements that our brain corrects itself to make it feel like we are looking at a single point.


No no no. The major reason people got headaches watching 3D films I'd say is because they are blurry. The movie techniques where you force the audience to watch the part of the screen you want by making everything else blurry doesn't work. It worked in 2D kinda I guess (or people got used to it?) but not in 3D when you try to focus on a different plane but since it's prerendered blurry it doesn't work. Nothing more nothing else. Film makers just got to use different tricks to draw the viewer eyes to the part of the image they want. And somehow, videogames went by fine without any such blurring tricks due to a lack of technology to make them, they'll be fine in the 3D future without them.

Actually, almost every game that has been made during the last 5 or 6 years have been developed to support 3D. However, 3D requires a lot of power, and that kind of hardware hasn't been available for less than a fortune up until about now. So I think that Skyrim definately will support 3D, to a certain extent anyway. But it would be awesome if they could focus more on 3D later on for an even more awesome experience

3D is actually quite old. This is the oldest one I've heard about (1936). No, I didn't watch it. In fact I learned about it just today: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0028532/technical

Not it is not. It is an autonomous process called 'accommodation reflex', which is hardwired into your cranial nerves. You can learn to overcome or trick the reflex, but it comes with associated problems when you start to stress the image processing in your visual cortex.

The other fact you are overlooking is that when playing the game you are not focussing at 80 feet or anything like it. For a computer screen you are actually focussing at 2-3 feet for the 'near' objects and perhaps 6 or 7 for the 'far' objects. Widescreen TVs can extend this to some degree, but still don't achieve 'infinity' convergence. Don't get confused by the illusion of the image you're viewing and the actual focussing distances.

On tv, I saw a 3D tv that works without glasses.
And the critics were that it's incredably good.