I listened to a bit of this. My resolution is pretty much the same as Eel's about buying less games, but if I do buy a game, not at full price.
About the 3DTV stuff, I'm interested in all that stuff only for gaming reasons. I tried out the Nvidia PC solution at a friends house a while ago and recently tried Wipeout HD in 3D. For movies I don't really care about it, but for games I think it can add a lot. The simplest use was in Wipeout HD where hud is closest thing to you. Everything else is 3D too from vehicles to the track but having the hud in the front makes it look like you have the benefits of a no-hud game without all the nonsense screen flashes and shit like that. The Nvidia stuff was great too. The glasses are pretty awful and uncomfortable, though. Only problem I had with Avatar 3D was the dimming but the 3DTV tech is just using shutter tech, and that slight flicker gets unbearable after a bit. Add that to the glasses not sitting on your face properly and it's something you don't want to be wearing for long stretches.
My interest is mostly for where the tech is going. They've already shown off the 3DTVs that don't require glasses, though, you only have a small range where it appears 3D. I'm hoping for these glasses 3Dtvs catch on enough that there is a lot of content for when there is a proper home solution that doesn't require glasses. If there is enough interest, you will have Sony and Panasonic and others then competing to make a TV that doesn't require glasses and all that.
and realistically, like the motion controls, 3D on the PS3 and 360 is probably just a test for whatever happens next gen. Wipeout both ran and looked noticeably worse in 3D because they had to had to draw two images. There is talk of Killzone 2 in 3D, and that game didn't even run at a smooth 30. Wipeout normally runs at 1080p 60fps, sometimes changing resolution in real time to keep the 60 fps. Or you can look at the benchmarks for the Nvidia stuff and see how much of a dip in performance there is when using 3D.
