Fair enough, I'll accept the pixels argument, can't refute that. I was going off measurements I made by hand between my old monitor and the new one.
It's definitely an early adopter technology. I didn't put the price under that much consideration because it came out of fun money and the extra fov seems worth it. You play PoE, right? Might be worth it for you.
EDIT: Let me put it another way. I only became interested in one of these because I saw screenshots of D3 on an ultrawide and immediately thought "cool". The guy had inventory and follower screens open and still a decent amount of the battlefield in view. It's those kind of things that can't be easily represented with just "33% more screen for 100% more money".
It's been a while since I've gotten excited for a computer upgrade. Most of the time, I buy something and all it does is pump out more pixels, texels, polygons, whatever, and I immediately get buyer's remorse. So much so, I still use an old PS/2 keyboard because it still works.
I haven't felt that remorse one bit with the ultrawide. The extra fov has proved worth the price because it allows me to play games differently. Maybe differently in a minor way, but not something more performance is as likely to accomplish. You might not see the same amount of benefit if you're already running dual monitors because now I can finally split browser windows without it being super cramped on one monitor.
If the desk wasn't a problem, would I have gone dual monitors instead? idk, I want to say I don't look at so many thing simultaneously while at home as opposed to work(seriously could use three monitors at work). But maybe game + youtube/stream/movie + browser would be useful. Would seem distracting too. Also, I've heard some games fullscreen fuck with the other monitor. And, being the engineer I am, I don't have to tell you that I've weighed the benefit of that last half of extra maybe-under-utilized screen versus the power it's pulling down.
Sorry for being extra rambly.
