Originally Posted by andy sullivan
I have indeed seen the animosity as long as we leave out the word absolute. I read and participate in all the 3D threads. My Real world must differ from yours greatly. My wife and I love 3D on our TV as do all of our friends.
I see more people on these threads that like 3D compared to the numbers that do not. The two never ending reasons given for not liking 3D seem to be, it gives me a headache, which is a very good and understandable reason, and I don't want to wear glasses, which is a very weak reason. Most of us wear sun glasses without much of a problem. Millions of people wear regular glasses without much of a problem. A typical 3D movie lasts less than 2 hours which really doesn't sound like torture.
People may wear glasses with no problem, but combining them with 3D glasses sucks. Thankfully, I wear contacts, so the glasses don't bother me. I just find too many movies just don't warrant the use of 3D, hence I usually opt not to choose the 3D presentation when I do go to the movies.
Now your statement that, "every person I know says the same thing, I',m not going to watch 3D until they can do it without glasses", every person? Right now people are flocking to see current 3D movies like "Man of Steel", "Epic", and Friday's release of "The Lone Ranger". And they are paying a premium for the 3D experience.
Every single one. While some will bear with wearing the glasses for a few select movies, they refuse to wear them for anything but the few movies they think will be worth it. I don't know anyone who watches 3D at home. Most tried it and decided it wasn't worth it.
You ask, where are those viewers, they are buying blu-ray 3D's and enjoying them on their new 3D TV's. What else are they supposed to watch? Do you think that the average person that goes out and spends a grand on a new 3D TV isn't going to want to watch something in 3D? They might not love it but they don't need to watch everything in 3D, just pick and choose. While I agree with you that streaming is a catchy trend with the younger crowd, that's also who is going to see 3D at the movies.
Most TVs of any size come with 3D capabilities. They didn't buy a TV that does 3D. The bought a TV that also does 3D along with everything else.
The fact is, few TV technologies have divided people as much as 3D. Even those that don't watch HD don't hate it - they just don't think it's worth it. The same goes for DVRs. Blu-ray had some animosity in the wake of the format war, but even those folks eventually sucked it up and bought in. With 3D, it almost feels like a religious argument. Those that hate it don't simply not want to watch it - they want it to die. I'm not sure why that is, but they do. It's not enough for them not to watch it, they don't want anyone else to be able to.
I'm glad you enjoy 3D and I feel badly for you that one of those sources is going away, but to assume ESPN should soak up the cost and continue down this road when pretty much no one else will is unrealistic. Their obligation is to put their resources toward those things they can leverage toward the most viewers possible.
3D isn't one of those things.