Fair play, people's preferences are ultimately a subjective thing

I would say when it's done properly it genuinely looks like the devs have found resolution that doesn't exist in the image

Here's a good example that I think demonstrates it clearly (though this is a real deal CRT in this image versus the kind of filters I'm talking about in this thread, though the goal is the same effect)

(Via https://mastodon.social/@ponysmasher/111025666005999438)

You and me both. I remember thinking our TV was cheap or shitty because the images never looked like this:

I went to Radio Shack a handful of times when I was 12 or so trying to buy better coaxial or component cables to “fix the problem,” not really understanding the fundamental issue.

I don’t care how it was intended to look- seeing those blocks pop in HD is so much more satisfying than muddy pixels smeared across a CRT.

Bad ones are yes, I addressed that at the end

The good ones make use of the higher resolution screens we have today to render the lower resolution images using the real pixels as subpixels to mimic the effect.

1080p is possibly not enough resolution to be convincing if that's what you last looked at; but at 4K, every 240i/480i console output pixel gets something like 8-16 real subpixels to work with

If you want 1 to 1 accuracy, yes you'll only get that with an actual CRT. But the modern high quality filters are much, much more than just fake scanlines, and can be pretty effective for the games that need them. You can usually choose the signal path to emulate, choose to use an aperture grille or different kinds of shadow mask, and often even deeper tweaks.

If you've not looked at them in a while and you've got appropriate hardware to run them well, have another look.

I wonder if you could create a shader that would do the job?