games/videos on 3:2 is just huge black bars. Definitely not for extended gaming.
I used (and still have) the original Chromebook Pixel in my closet with a 3:2 screen. amazing for browsing documents, but YouTube videos always felt off.
If your primary use of a computer is for gaming or video playback, then 16:9 does seem the right choice. If that is your use case, having anything taller than 16:9 means all of those extra pixels will primarily only ever be displaying black. What's the point of that? If your primary use of a computer is anything but games/videos, then the occasional letterboxing is much less egregious. As a gamer, instead of paying for more pixels, that money can be spent on faster refresh. Less pixels also helps allow for faster refresh, etc.
At home with TVs, I'm okay with the letter boxing to watch 1.85,2.35 type content on my 1.78 screen. It's the trade off as making a movie buff 2.35 screen would force majority of 1.78 content to be window/pillar boxed.
It's not a deal breaker; videos are just a mild inconvenience from the screen ratio. But if most of my usage is in media instead of documents, I'd prefer to utilize as much of the screen as possible.
My Pixel was mostly used as a portable school laptop for web browsing and development, so for those tasks it did a great job. But there was always that nagging feeling when viewing videos and seeing even more black bars on top/botton than even my 16:10 monitor at home.
I used (and still have) the original Chromebook Pixel in my closet with a 3:2 screen. amazing for browsing documents, but YouTube videos always felt off.