I don't know how people can still stomach sub-100dpi displays after looking at their high dpi mobile devices all day (with even budget phones being around 300dpi these days).
DPI calculation is not as simple as entering resolution and screen size and coming up with a DPI as
seen here. I do not look at my 1080P 15.6" laptop screen or my 32" 1440P screen at the same distance as I view my phone.
Using your logic a 4" iPhone 5/5S or any other smartphone has a superior display than a 1080P 55" LG OLED TV, 32" 1440P BenQ BL3200PT,
34" Acer X34 3440x1440 100Hz with GSync, etc.
If you only compare screens based on DPI, then I don't know what to tell you really. All I can say is any reasonable or logical discussion cannot be had with you at that point then. DPI/PPI is just 1 factor of many that matters.
Did you ever look at Samsung S6/Note 5's displays? It's not the pixels that make them amazing but everything else. This is evident when we go down to a lower PPI Samsung S5 and it still looks amazing.
Like I said, you are free to buy what you want but I bet any $$ that most PC gamers would much prefer a 4K 32-40" monitor if given the same price levels against a 24" one.
27" seems like the sweet spot for 4K to me, striking a nice balance between pixel density and size (assuming your software scales), although I prefer 24". Large monitor "immersion factor" is nice, but I'll wait until I can get one at ~200dpi.
I guess you have insane vision or are very sensitive to pixels.
As I am typing this, I am sitting 22-24" from my 15.6" 1080P laptop and I can hardly discern individual pixels in 2D or 3D unless I really make an effort to do so which isn't realistic for 8-10 hour workdays or 4-5 hour gaming/media consumption.
Further to my point earlier, when finding a calculator that accounts for distance when measuring DPI, on a 15.6" screen with 1080P, P
"]PI becomes ~300 at 24" on what is a 141 PPI screen otherwise.
Taking this idea further, on one of my work desks I have a 37" monitor positioned exactly 32" from my face. If I were to replace the said monitor with a 4K 40" one, at only 31" the monitor reaches Retina status or PPI of 300+. My desk though has another 7" of depth behind the existing 37" monitor so theoretically I could also buy a 46" 4K monitor and move it 7" back on the desk. I would then sit 32" + 7 = 39" away from the 46" 4K monitor. That monitor's pixels reach Retina (300 PPI) status at just 36 inches.
So once again, in the real world a 40" 4K or a 46" 4K monitor can easily become a 300 PPI monitor, thus easily exceeding your required 200 PPI number you outlined above.
http://isthisretina.com/
Thus, I do not follow the logic in your argument at all based on the criteria you have outlined. You seem to be calculating PPI without taking the viewing distance as a key context. This is not how PPI calculations work for humans in the real world. For example, the farther you sit from the monitor, the less pixels the human eye can resolve so the comparison you made of a 96 PPI 46" 4K monitor for gaming to a 300 PPI smartphone is flawed because at real world viewing distance when gaming at a desk in a chair, it's easily realistic that a 37-46" 4K monitor would be at 300 PPI.
If you are going to make the argument that the human eye can resolve 500-800 PPI ratings then that would be a different story but then we quickly get into insane land of diminishing returns while the immersion factor of a 37-46" 4K gaming screen demolishes the tiny 24" 4K.
and there are a lot of games on Dolphin Emulator and Wii U I haven't layed. So many games for me to be worried a bout the latest game that just came out.
I read somewhere that either Wii or Wii U games can only be emulated on an NV card? Was that true or?
Facebook
Twitter