>>720604538
Just saying, widescreen was the equivalent of VR from the 1950s, but because it was the 1950s, it's a low tech way to offer immersion.
Do you like VR or think it's a gimmick?

>Having one eyeball sucks because your FOV is lower. 4:3 sucks because the FOV is so low.
Not the same thing, because with TWO eyeballs, 4:3 is MORE than humans are able to see. It encapsulates everything we're able to see plus a little more. Widescreen is BEYOND our FOV, which is why worthless and superfluous information is relegated to the end parts in 99% scenes in movies and games.
Since you can't actually see what's going on on either side of the screen without turning your head, that information is practically worthless to you anyway. It's the same shit as having a 4:3 ratio if you're playing an action game, because it's happening "off screen".
Again, this is why movies generally don't put important shit on the end pieces in widescreen movies.

One thing you're not really realizing is that widescreens (and especially ultra widescreen that this thread is actually about) need to be even larger to give you the same amount of detail yo uwould see from a smaller 4:3 screen. Text, characters, items, buildings, and everything on screen will be much smaller on a widescreen, so you need to buy and have the space to have a larger screen to see the same amount of detail as you would on a 4:3 screen.

Personally, i have the space for that. I still having a giant 36" CRT and i have a 40something" widecreen that i pull in front of that CRT (it's on an articulated arm that moves back/front, up/down, side-to-side).