gaming-screen-info

HOR+ Field of Views at different aspect ratios
shaded red shows FoV lost at 16:10 vs 16:9 in the first two "streetview" images directly below

16:9/16:10 and multiple monitor aspect ratios to give further visual insights through visual representations

the following three photos are from the link above, credit for the blur amount testing listed directly below the photos goes to blurbusters.com also.

Of course the blurry monitors would have a much worse result in a full scene of complex objects, very high detail textures, depth via bump mapping, shaders, etc. being blurred in your entire viewport rather than a single cartoonish object example.

baseline - 60 Hz mode (16.7ms continuously-shining frame)
             - the worst blur "outside of the lines"/shadow masks of everything in the viewport
             - the lowest definition motion/animation, worse accuracy/timing/reaction time due to slower and less frequent action updates shown.
50% less motion blur (2x clearer)    - 120 Hz mode (8.33ms continuously-shining frame)
60% less motion blur (2.4x clearer) - 144 Hz mode (6.94ms continuously-shining frame)
85% less motion blur (7x clearer)   - 120 Hz LightBoost, set to 100% (2.4ms frame strobe flashes)
92% less motion blur (12x clearer) - 120 Hz LightBoost, set to 10% (1.4ms frame strobe flashes)

While I am very interested in blur reduction and optimally blur elimination, there are additional benefits to running high fps and high hz.
.
When I say "smoothness" I mean something separate from blur reduction. If I were using a general term for blur reduction I would use something like "clarity" or "clearness".
.
Smoothness to me means more unique action slices, more recent action going on in the game world shown - more dotted lines per dotted line length, more slices between two points of travel per se, more unique and newer pages flipping in an animation booklet, pick your analogy. It means less "stops" in the action per second and more defined ("higher definition") animation/action flow, which provides greater aesthetic motion and can increase accuracy, timing, and reaction time.
.
Disregarding backlight strobing for a moment.. As I understand it - where a strobe light in a room someone runs across would show blackouts, a typical lcd rather than blacking out just continues displaying the last "frozen" frame of action until it is updated. At 60hz that is every 16.6ms of course, and at 120hz and high fps it would have shown a new state of/peek into the room and run cycle 8.3ms sooner instead of freeze-frame skipping (over what would have been a new state at +8.3ms) to the next later state of the room and run cycle a full 16.6ms later. What is displayed of the entire animated world action in games is updated twice as often(and twice as soon) which can increase accuracy, and in providing more "dots per dotted line" per se, makes movement transitions "cleaner"/aesthetically smoother, providing higher definition movement and animation divided into 8.3ms updates. This goes hand in hand with blur reduction/elimination to make the entire experience a drastic improvement over 60hz/60fps.

.

.

You can get a korean 2560x1440 for all the ips desktop benefits outside of gaming pretty cheap. Some people are getting some 4k tv's as monitors now , but the colors aren't as good as a good ips I hear. That's great for everything outside of games.

For gaming I don't get people who want 60hz, horrible smearing and obliterating of detail blur outside of the "shadow mask" of everything in the entire viewport, 1/2 or worse the scene action slice updates shown per second, 1/2 or worse the smoothness/fluidity of motion. The ufo test may be good to show a plain example, but in actual 1st/3rd person games the entire viewport of cgi scene architecture and "geology", all onscreen creatures and objects and all high detail textures and shaders with be smeared out.
.
Many also demand resolutions that cripple fps for gaming. Even 2560x resolutions are prohibitive on $750 - $1k in gpus to get high fps at medium, high, or high+/custom settings. 1080p looks like the sweet spot for enthusiast level budgets without going to extreme budgets (extreme $1500 - $2k + in gpus alone). You can get 100 - 120+ fps in a lot of games with a gtx780 or a titan at 1080p with the settings very high. On BF3 you can get 120fps with a gtx -6-80 on medium for that matter.
.
I find it very aggravating that several review/benchmark sites are not even including 1080p into their tests lately by the way.
.
I wish blurbusters would consider doing some of it's camera motion tracking tests(60hz, 120hz, 144hz, lightboost modes) on some popular games to show the effect of the entire viewport smear on very high detail scenes/textures/shaders and post the pictures in addition to the ufo photos. I think it would provide further enlightenment.
Unfortunately, unless you have a 120hz or greater input monitor, you are limited in examples to showing the blur amount still shots and are unable to show the increased action slices or aesthetic smoothness of motion outright.
.

The tradeoffs are FoV motion blur vs reduced or eliminated, color quality and uniformity, resolution and resolution vs fps limitations/budget extremes, high or low definition movement/animation/updates and aesthetic smoothness, lower or higher accuracy due to the number of more recent game world action/scene updates being displayed.

Personally I want 100fps+ on a 120hz monitor for my games (over 120fps optimally). Whatever my gpu budget is vs how demanding a game is limits what video settings quality i will set a game at. For me, sub 100fps and not running a 120hz monitor is not "ultra" graphics/display experience at all. It is not max settings to me, or perhaps "max configuration" and maximum presentation of the game world to me.
60hz monitors/tv's blur the entire viewport during FoV movement 50% more than 120hz at high fps, and 60% more than 144hz at high fps. Low fps and/or low hz also show half or less the most recent action slices per second, which means lower accuracy//lower motion tracking, lower reaction time since action data is shown less often, and lower aesthetic smoothness of motion/fluidity of motion.

Maximum blur and the worst aesthetic motion smoothness (and reduced accuracy) is not the best/max visual presentation of a game.