less than a metre, i'm right next to it.

As long as you're happy, that's all that matters.

Personally, I'm okay with anything above 720p. Everything else is gravy. I definitely appreciate higher resolution and more power but 720p is "good enough".

I said people with lower quality 4k panels with not as good upscaling tech might not have the same experience as you. 

You're adamant this could never be true due to you not using an expensive TV. So it must mean there can't be a worse TV than yours so no one could possibly have a lesser experience.

This is so true, no matter what people say, especially for videos.  Hell even some 320p video can look amazing when you are 30 feet away lol.

I play on a 42" TV and most of my Switch games look excellent on it. I'm not sure that qualifies as a "large TV" these days though haha.

Some of the more technically demanding current gen ports like Doom 2016, Wolfenstein II and Witcher 3, which can drop to sub-HD resolutions, can look a bit blurry, but never to an intolerable degree.

Games like Mario Odyssey or Luigi's Mansion 3 on the other hand look awesome.

Keep in mind also, that 20/20 vision doesn't represent the pinnacle of human ocular acuity either... It's a "Snellen fraction".
20/20 represents the distance from the visual-chart, aka. 20 feet and the second 20 represents the size/line of the text.

So someone with 20/10 vision has twice the sharpness of someone with 20/20... In-fact it's pretty normal for younger individuals to have superior 20/15 or better vision.

*******

I played Breath of the Wild on a 65" screen via the WiiU... So 720P. It looked... Well... Fine. - It looks better on the Switch with it's higher peak resolution of around 900P docked.
Sometimes I played it on the WiU's handheld at 480P... And again. It looked fine. - I'm not writing books about it though.

The most noticeable effect resolution has is on general clarity of an image, lower-resolution games will exhibit some graphical artifacts such as "stair stepping", this becomes even more pronounced on busy-scenes where there is a ton of micro-details such as in Crysis. (Although the console variant seems to be scaled back on foliage, so maybe not as pronounced.)

And it can also be noticeable with texture details as well, lower-resolutions again will hide those micro-details baked into texture maps... This was most evident with Halo 3 where allot of details in the texture maps were hidden by the Xbox 360's low resolution, but certainly "pop" on the Xbox One X 2160P output.

It doesn't mean the games visual artistic style looks different, it's the same game, with the same assets, it's just a clearer image and you can appreciate some of the finer details that artists worked on.



*****

Now why some might feel the Switch's resolution is not a big deal is because Nintendo doesn't typically invest a ton of effort into micro-details, they have very clean outputs... Even if the final image is marred by stair stepping, their games don't look bad, it's just a design choice.
Nintendo also have some of the best art teams in the gaming industry, so often keeping things simple and clean results in an image that looks great at lower output resolutions.

That's definitely a "pro" in Nintendo's camp, especially as they tend to be allergic to anti-aliasing.

So in short, the games never looked bad... But they can always look a little bit better thanks to the higher resolution, Breath of the Wild on PC at full 2160P with Ray Tracing is definitely a step up over the WiiU/Switch versions, but it's still the same game.



We also need to keep in mind of the resolution/distance chart above... But even that doesn't tell the entire story, different consoles have different upscalers, Microsoft has been amazing on this front with the Xbox One X, the up-scaling is great even for 720P and lower content.

But modern TV's will also do it's own up-scaling if you let it, but different televisions have different implementations and thus a 720P image scaled to 2160P at 75" may not be as good as the next TV due to various post-processing done. (Not to mention some displays add input latency.)

But you know what? If at the end of the day, you are enjoying the games irrespective of the technical shortcomings... Then non of this really actually matters.

I am definitely a graphics/resolution snob... I am a PC gamer.
But I have thoroughly enjoyed a few WiiU and Switch games in my time and I will likely enjoy Breath of the Wild 2.
In-fact one of my favorite games in the last few years is actually Links Awakening, the fantastic material shaders, depth of field and other effects provides a very clean, but charming presentation even if it is low-resolution... But it definitely would look a step up if it was higher resolution.

Some games look horrible and blurry, like Xenoblade 2, that did not look good sitting close to my 60" TV. Zelda Breath of the Wild actually looks bad also. Mario Odyssey and many others look fine.

You can obviate the problem through larger text and different camera choices.

42 inches and 3 meters puts me smack bang in the middle of "720p worth it", which explains why I've never had a problem with this resolution while so many insist it looks bad.

When my current screen dies, I hope they still sell screens of a similar size, I don't think I want a bigger screen if it'll make my games look worse.

Always this I guess. I don't have one and fine with how Switch looks on my crappy TV I may replace soon.

That chart is pretty much in the same ball park.

It recommends the following viewing angles for
720p -> between 11.5 degrees and 21.2 degrees, or 111 pixels per degree to 60 pixels per degree
1080p -> between 21.2 degrees and 31.2 degrees, or 91 pixels per degree to 62 pixels per degree
2160p -> between 31.2 degrees and 61.1 degrees, or 123 pixels per degree to 63 pixels per degree

So true, 20/20 vision is on the edge where higher resolution is considered worth it, same as the chart I put up there. In fact, if you're already at or over 60 pixels per degree that chart considers higher resolution not worth it.

But also very true that it all depends on the quality of upscaling. Modern techniques upscaling to 4K are much better than last gens sub 1080p to 1080p software scaling, or 720p to 1080p by the average tv. Next gen shouldn't have any of those issues and 1440p is plenty with good upscaling, 1080p will even be more than enough for most (most people's viewing distance is in the 20 degree range) hence Lockhart.

Sitting so close the viewing angle exceeds 40 degrees is also no good for a lot of games. I already had that issue at a 31 degree viewing angle (12ft from 92" projector). You lose oversight and some games (especially one where you had to control two things with both sticks at the same time on either side of the screen) become much harder than they should be. In fact Super stardust on PSVR is unplayable since you have no overview to where the enemies are coming from, you have to look back and forth the whole time. I also kept crashing in Burnout paradise on my projector since looking away at the map takes longer the bigger the screen. (Eye saccade speed limitation) Smaller screen, can more easily keep track of more.