Honestly, no worry about 3d getting obsolete. Having said that, I dont believe 3d is gonna stick. When you are playing a game, if you are really enjoying it, you are so focus that you dont pay attention to the 3d effect. In the end is useless.
I have Nvidia 3D vision. Unfortunately for me, Nvidia 3D vision 2 came out just a few months later. Luckily for you, Nvidia 3D Vision 2 is relatively new, so the standard should stick around for a while.
Even though I have the older standard, I think it's worth it. Games which play well with 3D vision, I do not play any other way. Unfortunately a lot of games have issues, like shadows being rendered in 2D.
Recently, I found a fix for these issues in many games along with a tool to help me fix my own games. I'm not sure how many games it'll be able to fix, but it looks awesome in The Witcher 2, Crysis 2, Skyrim (with fix), Kingdoms of Amalur (with fix), StarCraft 2, Dragon Age 2, Titan Quest, Torchlight and probably more.
If you play competitively, you may find 3D vision is a waste, but if you don't, it is that much more immersive.
One more note. If you want to do 3D, do not wimp out on the video cards. People with low FPS sometimes complain about getting headaches, while I get motion sickness (same issue without 3D for me). 3D vision does require more power, about 50% more, so plan accordingly, or use lower settings to compensate.
Lightboost is Nvidia 3D Vision 2, so I do not. I have seen a few rave about how it improves things a lot in other threads.
When 3D works correctly, I'd rate it a 9/10. I take a point away due to darkness.
Counting games which don't work, which I gravitate away from, then perhaps I'd have to give it a value of 7/10. Now days, I always look up Nvidia's built in compatibility guide before buying games. If they aren't compatible, I make sure it's a great game, or I don't buy it.
I do not have 3D at home, but I have used it on a few demo units at Fry's and Microcenter. It looks awesome!
That being said, I am with you on your worries about standards and things becoming obsolete. It is kinda like PhysX, it is a great feature if you have a game that supports it correctly, but if it does not then it causes issues that take you out of the game. If you have money to blow, then go for it. But if you are more conservative with your money then wait another 2-3 years and I think we will see a lot of improvements in the hardware (especially graphics cards being able to push out decent 3D frame rates), as well as better software support from game developers. This is especially true as augmented reality glasses are coming up soon, which may be a better direction to go in for 3D gaming than the good old screen.
I'd say it's still far better than PhysX for a couple reasons.
1) it's better supported than PhysX, which only supports about 20 games.
2) Even if you don't use 3D vision in a game, you gain 120hz on the monitor, so it's not completely going to waste. (This is why I bought a 3D vision monitor, for 120hz. It turned out I love 3D vision).
I use AMD HD3d setup throught TriDef, with a S23A750D monitor. I've only had it working at a decent performance for a little while (upgraded from 4870 to 7870), but I am quite happy with my purchase (though I only paid 450 for my monitor which came with glasses). It definitely takes graphics to another level.
I get pretty good performance (40-50fps per eye) in skyrim on high using a 7870 and a PhenomII 965(i think). I find it to be very immersive, and well worth the extra 200$ extra cost to the price of a monitor, as I was planning an upgrade anyway.
The launcher system for games can be a bit of a pain in the ass at times, you have to be willing to mess with it once in a while; but they do support it constantly with updates and stuff. I'm sure the nVidia solution is as good or better, but I preferred the more open path myself, knowing full well that it wasn't as 'out of the box ready' (although there are alot of nvidia users on the tridef forums, so there maybe some stuff that it does better than nvidia).
Also, I second the comment about no whimping out on your hardware. Low FPS is not fun in 3d. The graphics card is most important, but your CPU also needs to be able to handle the added load, most games it seems ok, but I've got an i7 on the way to replace my Phenom2 because more CPU intensive games are even more CPU intensive.
Yes,3D vision technology is just awesome and a newer way to experience a gaming world which engraves a new image as though you are really in the environment which is just looking like an actual environment and the experience goes above when your physx is active and all settings at maximum which gives you the additional graphics work done one gaming or a really rich environment of graphics.
For example,Batman Arkhum City,Crysis 2,Test Drive Unlimited 2,Just Cause 2,etc are some of the popular game titles which are configured as 3D Vision Ready.
The most important point is that the monitor has a refresh rate of 120Hz which gives a maximum fps achievement of 120 which is not possible with less refresh rate monitors.
My personal experience about 3D vision technology is that I am using it from last 8 months and now I am so much adaptive to it that I play all the games as well as movies on 3D vision only because as I earlier said it gives a newer experience and a better option of graphical representation.I stick to it for more then 6 hours a day now you can calculate the importance of 3D vision by yourself.
For Best experience visit a local dealer which gives a live demo about 3D vision technology as this is totally dependent on the user to have it or not.I would like to say that having it is the best option.Don't think for the future as we all know within every month the technology is upgrading or changing tremendously.