[NekkoDroid]

Well, that is usually refering to some form of "simulated fluid motion", not new characters appearing and disappearing. The only case where that kinda fluid motion would matter is when you have text scrolling by at semi-fast speeds.

[ffsm8]

I count myself among the people that would consider >60hz necessary.

For me, it's animations, especially if I'm dragging a window or just the mouse. On 60hz it's nauseating if I'm paying too much attention to the window I'm moving. It's goes completely away around 90-100 Hz (at least for me)

[LoganDark]

I've had the privilege of using a merely 90Hz display and the difference is still incredible. It gives me input feedback much faster so my brain does not have to do as much buffering/prediction, everything feels a lot more direct. One would think a measly 5 milliseconds wouldn't amount to much, but for input feedback it absolutely does.

I do not suffer from nausea or motion sickness of any kind arising from computers or visuals in general, but I can still easily tell the difference between a 60Hz and 90Hz display. A few months ago I had the privilege of checking out the 120Hz displays on the new MacBooks and they're amazing.

[NekkoDroid]

I'd still say that draggin a window would count as a "simulated fluid motion". Maybe not something you'd immediatly think of, but its still trying to convey the sense of motion. Just text appearing and dissappearing isn't something I personally could categorize ass the same type of animation.

And I also count myself as someone who considers 120 at least necessary (on the primary monitor)