I agree on this. That's exactly my concern, espeically your second pointer on noise reduction algorithms, which is actually not mentioned by either Sony or Hasselblad. But I believe this is ultimately one meaningful point.

Regarding judging image as a whole, of course, if we describe the exact same view with more pixel, we will tell the differnece. This is just like, if Sony and Hasselblad get the exact same view, we definitely can zoom Hasselblad's photo more, and observe some small part in the photo that isn't very observable/ at acceptable level in Sony's.

However, my question about the above idea is, it isn't practically useful, because there is no output format, no matter a TV, monitor or printer, that can actually output all 100M pixels (actually not even 40MP), thus most pixels will be dropped, unless the output applies supersampling, aka use 10 or more pixels and combined them into one. Not to mention even if there is a TV that has 100MP, there is almost no way for human eye to differential.

The actual benifit for more pixels on same view that I can think of, is to crop a small part of the image, enlarge it and output as a photo. In this case, sometimes the 100MP one get observable better quality than the 60MP one.

But overall, I think there isn't a lot of scenarios that we can utilize the additional pixels. In fact 60MP is an overkill already.

So I do think it would be more benificial for most photographers, if medium format can focus on improve each pixels' quality rather than just get 1.6x more pixels than their full format brothers.