Why Should We Bother With 3D Now?
Are we willing to sacrifice image brilliance and saturation for our content to slightly pop out?
Nvidia went through the trouble of putting up its own tent a block away from Taipei 101 for COMPUTEX 2010 visitors. Inside were showcases of various products and hardware using Nvidia technology, including laptops, all-in-one PCs, and reference GPU cards.
But the focus of the venue was clearly Nvidia's push into the 3D market. There were multiple three-display workstations, all running popular video games in 3D mode. For those who haven't tried viewing 3D yet, the screens presented a slightly blurry picture to plain sight. Users have to wear a pair of glasses for a clear image. If the format of the content supports it, objects slightly pop-out for the viewer.
Basically, current 3D technology creates the illusion of depth. Objects closer to the viewer pop out more. The problem is that this illusion isn't usually convincing. Worse, the tinted 3D glasses usually take away some of the saturation and brightness of the picture. The image is still clear, albeit darker and with less difference between the colors.
So there we were, showing off our mad driving skills on NFS: Shift, weaving through a virtual racetrack perceived via 3D glasses. And while we handily won the race, we left with the impression that nVidia's offering was pretty much the same as everyone else's. Wear the glasses for a clear, yet slightly darker image.
Sure, it's sometimes great to see objects pop-out slightly from the screen. But when the experience isn't impressive enough to be a must-have, it's probably best to wait for companies to make consumer 3D level technology more convincing.

Top that off with >$4000 in hardware to be able to recreate the environment they had...no thanks.
Anyone here see Avatar in 3D? I thoroughly enjoyed watching a high res, bright & saturated image on my home TV vs. the 3D version at the theater.
Top that off with >$4000 in hardware to be able to recreate the environment they had...no thanks.
3D= Money wasted.
Sure some people will get it and the rest will nod and whisper to each other "But he isn't wearing any clothes?"
It seems imminently sensible that a 3D design program would benefit greatly if it could utilize even existing 3D technology.
All for a marginal increase in effects.
Why can you spend a grand on one and not on the other?
@mpdugas
most CAD packages have had this ability long time ago, it just never took off, it really didn't give you that much added value considering the performance hit, it can only project a limited perception of depth, you need full motion head tracking to even simulate any useful depth perception (maybe this in conjunction with natal might work)
I watched Avatar in 3D. While it wasn't the sole reason I went, I thought it added a little something to the movie. But, Avatar was created from the ground up with 3D in mind.
I'm still waiting for the 1st PC game designed to be in 3D and not have it added as an afterthought. I think only that will give the user a true idea of the possibilities.