@ShinTakU: Lol, yeah but megaman 9 never pretended that you could win ;)

@infinite_bias: "How many people that are excited about GT5 are going to truly get the full experience? How many people out of the fawning masses mesmerized by the lifelike graphics are going to know the difference between R32 and R33 Skylines? How many are going to know how to properly calibrate camber, differential…

"Someone else can walk in the room and say "Xbox... pause" and your game will be stopped"

@im2fools: I was being dense and thinking in terms of cleanup rather than stemming the flow. For a cleanup, even assuming the area the oil is present in is as low as one quadrillion gallons, it would take 200,000 years to clean with those machines. [en.wikipedia.org]

That is genius :)

Unfortunately 200 gallons a minute is - quite literally - a drop in the ocean. Hopefully it can do some good though.

@criosray: See this link [www.hdmi.org] this is what 3D signals are generally transmitted over* , hence my comment. You need a set capable of decoding this signal, most sets currently do not. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

@Crawl to China: Although you're right, probably a bit childish of me to say I'd stop reading.

@Crawl to China: That's what live blogs are for.

@EtrnL_Frost: So it's akin to a person with hyperacusis previously being assigned to write an article on the new technology of stereo sound - a bit silly.

I never thought I'd see Sonic on a Nintendo system, things change. Never is a long time :)

@Kaiser-Machead: With any luck polarised sets will become more popular (still new tech when applied to large TV's), with those the glasses are extremely cheap as there's no electronics associated (as you know!) and from what i've seen the picture can be even better than with active shutter. There are lots of pubs…

@EtrnL_Frost: Tell the author that :)

@Kaiser-Machead: It's a shame really, would be nice if people could watch the same thing in 2D/3D as they preferred.

@criosray: You'd still need a TV capable of processing the signal.

@Piledriver: Active shutter tech is fairly lame, polarised looks much better and glasses cost <$1 to make. Good chance bestbuy didn't set the TV's up correctly, I still see lots of terrible looking HD sets when I go in the local equivient, so what are the chances of them getting 3D right? (If you go back, have a go at…

@Mike43110: Anaglyph is horrible, if this is most people's only experience of 3D media no wonder so many people are vocal against it.

@tande04: The shutter is irrelevant, this is equally applicable to a 120hz tv with active shutter glasses or a polarised 60hz set and glasses. Sony could also add Anaglyph for people without (as nvidia do), but I'm not sure they'd want to.

@kazoni: "I don't see your RealD glasses working on 3d tv's since RealD's rotational polarization is considered proprietary."

@MacAttack: You were right, active shutter and polarised 3D systems both look blury without glasses. Without glasses you see both images at once for polarised sets, or one image at a time on active shutter. But with active shutter the images are shown so close together they appear merged and little different to the…