Originally Posted by video_analysis
Yes, many of the 2016 buyers. They are easy to ignore because the 65" OLED TVs with 3D support were still $3500 and up that year (there was a drop to under $3k for a short time). Thus, LG obtained well under 1% of the marketshare in 2016 so of course that's a drop in the bucket next to total TV sales. The zero blacks of OLED make the 3D (especially shots of space) more enveloping than most theaters. I saw Gravity in 3D at the theater and hardly remember the experience. To be blunt: Until one has seen a reference 3D title on a passive OLED, I table ho-hum dismissals as talking out of one's ass. If one has a physical condition that causes discomfort, that is another matter entirely.
Regardless, there are a lot of us out there that just don't like the 3D home experience. The glasses are annoying, and the 3D just looks fake to some of us. If anything, I just find 3D irritating, partially because it doesn't actually look like 3D to me. It looks like layers of 2D on top of one another, like those stereo picture things. If anything, it takes me out of the experience instead of drawing me in.
And yes, it causes me discomfort too. It gives me headaches in some cases, but not all the time.
I get that you like it, esp. with your TV, but I think you underestimate the inconvenience factor for the masses. Do you really expect families to buy 5 sets of glasses so that they can watch a 3D movie at home? Just about nobody I know has done that, even the rare 3D fan. It's like they buy it for themselves and then force their wife to watch too, but that's about it. At a certain point, convenience trumps quality and/or features.
But it's moot. 3D is dead. We can speculate all we want about the reasons, but it's too late now. It's dead and it's not coming back.
Actually, in terms of convenience vs. quality, the real winner here is Netflix 4K HDR. That has both quality and convenience. Way better than 1080p cable, and way more convenient than 1080p Blu-ray, and arguably more convenient than cable too. The main thing it is missing is up-to-date network TV, news, and sports.
OTOH, I think the masses might actually buy into 8K. Why? Because it doesn't decrease the convenience factor in any way. I'd be overjoyed if they just continued to develop 4K to maximize its potential instead of concentrating on 8K, but I won't argue against 8K per se either, because it won't come with the baggage of inconvenience.