The reality that to get any kind of 3D picture from a 2D screen means wearing a twosome of sunglasses or inferior means that three dimensional gaming isn’t fairly as persuasive as multi-touch and usual user interfaces, even though the two have been commoditized at approximately the same time.
An Acer Aspire laptop with a 3D display the moment, not bad for something with cutting border technology that adds depth to any DirectX 9 game. The screen is of the polarized sieve type, which is the new standard for extra dimensions.
Instead of using colored filters splitting an image into two – one for every eye – the vertical pixel columns are alternated between left image and right image and shone through a piece of polarized glass. A pair of dark glasses with oppositely polarized lenses ensures that only one image is seen by each eye. The difference to a game is tangible too; something like Wow runs and looks unbelievable on the low-end graphics hardware.
It’s over in TV land that the real shove for 3D is happening, though, as LCD suppliers ask us to improve again to watch hyper-real movies in the lounge. Compared to the additional technologies we have talked about here, though, 3D requires a lot of attempt on behalf of the viewer (those annoying glasses) and most of us are very indolent; therefore the ubiquity of MP3 and standard description movies, while Blue-ray and higher declaration sound standards persist to flounder. We value ease of use over excellence every time.
In its favor, 3D doesn’t in fact require any effort on behalf of games developers or publishers, as the stereoscopic picture is created at the driver height. On the other offer, that means there’s no huge push by the people who make and sell games to persuade us to assume it.