Batman Arkham Aslyum SE to be in 3D

It's using TriOviz's 3D technology. It does some analysis of the video output and makes small changes to generate an anaglyph image. The viewer uses magenta/green glasses to resolve the 3D effect. It's a more subtle 3D effect than can be had with dedicated 3D hardware, but it's cheap, works with standard refresh rate TVs, and minimizes the framerate hit.

I have tried the IZ3D driver and that driver too makes an anaglyph image so you'll need red/magenta glasses. It works but not good. It is really hard to get everything in the picture sharp and after a while my eyes got really tired from the weird colours.

My advice would be against using the red/magenta glasses.

Red/green (or similarly colored) anaglyph 3D effect was invented to display uncolored images. It works fine for mostly desaturated images too. Keep in mind that green = blue + yellow. So you have all the primary colors being used to encode 3D depth.

[How 3D projection tech works and why it will never be cheap]
The thing carrying the depth information cannot be too similar to the thing carrying the picture information, else it leads to confusion. Check out the 3D electron micrographs from the 1970's...worked very well.

The main advantage of red/green 3D is that it can be displayed with a regular projector or monitor, and each person needs $.50 red/green filters to see the effect. You can encode depth using polarized light too, and now you get color information back for your displayed image. But you have to project/display at least 2X the normal framerate (one image per eye per frame, versus one per brain per frame).

Linear polarized glasses have been used a long time at Disney themeparks and in the scientific community...but you must either buy an expensive polarized screen/projector or expensive polarized shutter glasses to show the effect. The cheaper solution is to use a 120Hz monitor with polarized shutter glasses, but that's still around $100 per set of glasses.

The new "RealD" technology uses circular polarization, which is technically superior because it maps the 3D effect more uniformly throughout a room...so in a theatre, you don't have to sit in the sweet spot and hold your head straight to get a well-calibrated 3D effect. Great for theatres, but it still requires a fancy (and v.expensive) polarized projector/screen.

Another kind of 3D effect takes advantage of perspective to encode depth, and this requires no glasses or special projection/screen. However, it typically only works for a single viewpoint, so only one person in the room sees the effect, and they have to keep their eyes at a particular point in space to maintain the effect...not very practical or comfortable. The "Magic Eye" books generate 3D images using a related technique...by generating an overlapping field of vision when you defocus (or overfocus) your eyes through the picture. Makes for a great picture, if you can see it. But no way it would be comfortable to defocus/overfocus for a 2-minute video clip, much less a 2-hour movie or video gaming.

I tried for years to find an economical way to display my scientific work in 3D to an audience, on the cheap. There is none. You must either buy an expensive projector, outfit your audience with expensive glasses, or accept the lack of color in the presentation. I ended up using physical models rather than 3D video. I find it amusing to see how 3D video makes a comeback every 10 years or so at the consumer shows. The technology definitely works, and has for a long time...but nobody has been able to "democratize" it in a way that works for colored video. You either get a great high-end and very convincing effect for big $$, or you get a cheap novelty-level effect for modest $$. That said, the RealD technology is great, I'm a big fan...especially when a theater can average the cost of the projector over many many movie watchers. And hey, maybe Batman is sufficiently monochromatic that the red/green will work well!

It messes up with the colours big time though from the different solutions I have tried... Depth and such can be really good though so that is not a problem.

The messing up with the colours was a big no no. I am going to go with true 120 hertz lcd the next time it´s time to upgrade my LCD TV. Just hope I don´t have to wait 10 years for a reasonable priced 32" which performs great in standard 2D too.

I think it´s cad that todays LCD monitors still hasn´t surpassed the old CRT screens regarding anything but sharpness

if i run the game from my laptop which has ATI HD4650 mobility radeon graphic card.

and then i plug it via HDMI to my 40" sony bravia LCD.

will i be able to enjoy 3D ?

anaglyph 3D doesn´t really demand any particular hardware so yes.

It´s like these magazines you can get in 3D... It´s the same method really you just need the glasses to get the 3D.

Not true! They win for convenience and size per dollar too. I also miss the color gamut of a good CRT, but I love having dual monitors and desk space to spare .

who cares about convenience or size for dollar? If so I would have to deal with wireless headphones which sound crap as long as they are comfortable and offer small storage space or something

In my current room I couldn´t use a 50 kg 32" CRT TV though that would be the first thing I would by if I get a bigger house