Perhaps in 2003 when the original came out. Screens are meant to show what they can show. However, we're getting so far in comparing old engined that: my eye also can watch an apple degrade into a maggot ridden husk. Without being too flippant, Crysis was used as it's a bit of a joke that the CryEngine in which the game Crysis 1, 2, 3 etc. is based was initially a joke as a massive hog on system resources and also a new graphical standard. It may not be so any longer but it's a bit of a catchphrase "can it run crysis"? Many Raspberry PIs and Beagle Boards have tried and died.

I didn't. I was sure it was "Can it play Crysis?" Perhaps this is why Google didn't bring all the boys in the yard (in daylight, their 3gb Titans are better than yours).

But that's by necessity in having a compact device and competing in a saturated market. Let's consider Iiyama in the 90s - they had clearly a lead in the PC screen market until roughly 2001. Sure we can argue that the format change to TFT made a difference but the simple fact is that when you came down to high end anti-ghosting screens for soviet Russian to product anti-Google maps sites; it was king. Iiyama has been squashed as a market leader from this period - not down to providing inferior products but by not adapting to demand. However, we're seeing in sales for tablets that consumers simply don't care about PPI and the ipad/or competitors don't look at PPI. I own a Nexus 10 and I realise that I'm a very small minority that do. It's a great device but PPI means crap against an Apple brand or even an ASUS brand.

Definitely but when we are adjusting the horizontal and the vertical, the outer limits comes and bashes us in the head. The bigger screen and neck movement results in the new need for AA.

Ok, so 4K is marketable as a PPI gambit. This makes a lot more sense with your application. The problem is that 4K has to be mass market to drive down the price of such a thing and as we saw with 90s Apple hardware, the application won't drive it. Style won't drive a 4k screen either so there will have to be a mass market attitude change and media that moves with it. DVD is the only thing I can think of which bucked the trend - years of lacklustre DVD sales before the format took off. Are we seeing a pre-emptive product that is aimed at break even before media can support? Essentially we'd need non-niche 4K media to make the average consumer buy it.

We've all seen Star Wars in ASCII. It was devoid of Jar Jar. I'm inclined to agree with your statement.

Blimey... Duke Nukem 32! I meant 3D! I can't imagine a time in which we can quantify between Duke Nukem 3D, Forever and version 32!

I think this was the OP point - we don't have the graphical hardware to display the content. I'm sure conventional means have the bandwidth - HDMI 2.0 has 14.4 Gbit throughput for the video but the authors of the content don't provide the content in the right format. So the next best thing is that which is extensible i.e. Games and such. At the moment, you may be able to provide the resolution but the actual content is not scaled to be so. We're talking about Duke Nukem 32 on 1080p monitors - it seriously does not look good without the crazy modpack the community has provided. A fine example of bad resolution textures is Deus Ex 3 - a very decent linear game but terrible textures when upscaled to 1080p. I can't imagine what this would look like on 4K

Have you seen the GPU load playing badly optimised games like Planetside 2 on single monitor? You might be able to find games that a 7970 etc will be fine with multi-screen but the majority of developers are still in 2007 in terms of multi-screen.

True, but it's not that bad with AA - it's only noticeable with static images like with the logon screen.

Surely that'll be Core's Law?

I'm wondering if the visiting aliens will see a giant goatse from space, the melted hole surrounded by ice will look rather like that!