I can't say that it would have been an entirely different world now, but 3D would definitely have been a more ubiquitous technology had active-3D never ever existed. That infernal flash/flash/flash/flash joke technology with it's originally super heavy and expensive battery driven glasses hung around the neck of the 3D world like a rotting fish on a string.
You ask the average person about 3D TVs, and I can guarantee you that almost none of them heard of passive 3D. It's common for a guest at my house to see the slew of glasses that I have and shake their head at how expensive it must be. They always think they're about $75 each.
The true longer term problem with 3D however isn't that, but is this relentless misconception that it's a somehow an element of a movie that can stand on its own merits without the plot of the movie, when in fact it's a means to better deliver the plot of the movie. From either confusion or sheer stupidity or both, people never quite learned the lessons of Avatar and Gravity, or did so too late, and as a result we're stuck in an ocean of "3D is gimmicky" ignorant statements.
Edited by tgm1024 - 1/7/14 at 6:11am