It's actually quite another issue. If you listen to people claiming that "NAT killed IPv6", that is a different point. IP is all about end to end connectivity. There are no special "server privileges" you need on IP-networks. It is like the telephone network. Everybody can do anything. You don't need special stuff to run your own "information hotline", you just get a connection and there you go.
If a person claims that "NAT is sufficient" it essentially means that they have given up on that. They are contempt with an Internet which does distinguish between those who have a public IP-Address, and those tho are behind NAT. It's a world dominated by large "hyperscalers".
IPv6 offers another Internet. It offers one, where everyone can simply run their own "webserver" from their bedroom. Everybody has their own IPv6 addresses. There is full end-to-end connectivity, if you open your firewall. There is no need to ask someone for permission to run your own IPv6 "server". It is a network that is free to anybody.
If you look into the world, you'll find logs of CGNAT, where your ISP is already doing NAT... often at great expense and often multiple times, particularly in poor countries where not even your ISP may have a public IPv4 address. In those areas IPv4 is, essentially, a closed system you cannot participate in. It's like an "Online Service" like AOL or Compuserve. In those places the only way to get actual Internet is via IPv6.
BTW we are already at roughly half the Internet traffic being IPv6, I've recently been at a colocation facility where they only provided IPv4 at special request... and that essentially just works.