People a bit too hung up on refresh rate these days IMO. 120hz with BFR is preferable to 240hz without. The 42" C2 is a disaster for gaming because it only supported BFR at 60hz, despite being advertised as a "120hz" display.
I mean, the difference in motion clarity is obvious. I'm guessing most people here are using this display for gaming, right? Why wouldn't you want better BFI?
rtings has a motion clarity example for the 42" C2 and 48" C1, which you can see here:
C1 with 120hz and BFI...
Yeah this ruins the display for me. I don't know why they removed it, but it's no longer something I'm willing to buy because they removed 120hz. The 48" C1 has it, and is half the price.. like, what the fuck are they thinking?
4k @ 32" is only ~138 ppi, so I don't think this has any real impact on these specific panels. I believe this is more relevant to extra high pixel density displays (300-400+) like in smartphones.
I hope they drop a 42" soon, I noticed there was a press release about making 42" panels. A 42" 4k 120hz display would make a great monitor. 48" is a bit big. Now the problem is getting a hdmi 2.1 compatible video card for a reasonable price.
I personally think a larger display with the same resolution won't help at all, and in fact (at the same text size) it may be worse. I'd look for a 4K display, as text at any size is going to be more legible with higher pixel density.
Since it's FALD instead of edge lit, It's unlikely there will be issues with backlight bleed as we recognized it on their 27" IPS gsync panels in acer/asus displays. TV's with FALD have flashlighting issues inherent to the technology but I've never seen any serious edge bleed.
I think we're going to have to wait for panels coming out of China for any crowdfunding. I don't really think a crowdfunded display would be able to source panels from LG, Samsung, or Japan Display. I could be wrong though.
You absolutely can, but many of the benefits going from 32" 4k to 32" 8k are going to be most obvious when it comes to text legibility. That isn't a bad thing, but take a look at your 350-400ppi smartphone and you'll realize that beyond that sort of density, there are very diminishing returns...
My mind is consistently blown by people who don't even enable ULMB on ULMB capable displays. ULMB @ 120hz is much, much clearer than a regular "fast" LCD @ 165hz, at least on my 27" Acer.