Every generational leap since 4th to 5th has been smaller than the one before it really; huge paradigm shifts gradually gave way to incremental refinement and diminishing returns kicked in.

I don't expect Helix to buck this trend, but it will be interesting regardless to see what it can pull of graphically. 

There will be a few path-tracing games....

Apart from that, I don't expect a jump in visuals, apart from say maybe everything running 120hz/120fps being the norm.
I think people will need to upgrade TV's alongside their consoles, if they don't already have one able to run 120hz refresh rates.


So like Imagine a ported game:
Switch 2 = 30fps
PS5/XSX = 60fps
PS6/New Xbox = 120fps 

All looking kinda similar in visuals.... just running at differnt speeds.

I think Image Quality and RT will be as big if not bigger differences than 120hz for most games but it will entirely depend on the gamer and their set up too. Poor FSR image quality is very noticeable for third party games Playing on a big TV, current performance modes rarely aim above 1080 internally, so having an actual 4k image at 60-120fps with the extra graphical perks is a nice jump.

Take for example RE9, PS5 Pro already has a 120hz mode but people don't really talk about it because the big story there is actually how good the RT60 mode looks with its 4k-like image. For Helix 120hz will be there alongside all the other bells and whilstles, so it'll be the combination of all 3 perks firing at the same time. 

I agree we won't see huge differences in terms of core assets but I'm curious whether we also see the next wave of AAA games like Witcher4/Mass Effect/Elderscrolls etc start to push graphics further or have new features that reveal a bigger gap between the high end PC experience & console.

I think this is fair.  Path still has a long way to go.  My 4090 can't run path well at all.  

120 fps is absolutely bliss and worth it.  The improved controls is addictive, at least for me.

I also expect better effects like particle and volumetric.  

I think cross generational games will be permanent, at the very least 5 to 6 years. 

Edit

I do think the price, for consoles, will me monstrous.  If the 48 gb rumors are true, I would expect 2k at least.  

It is true that every gen have smaller leaps, but Helix (and PS6) will be the generation that allows for Path Tracing to be fully implemented in lot of games - at least when it comes to more contained game worlds.

Think Alien Isolation type of game fully path-traced...or some Souls-like dungeon crawler (like Deep Down appeared to be when it was revealed).

This is a valid point, but price on its own is a key factor right now. Streaming platforms are seeing widespread adoption of lower-tier subscriptions with partial ad support, much for the same reason. Owning expensive tech used to be desirable by most, but it looks like a new age is emerging where people take functionality over premium quality, especially in the sections of products that can be labelled optional or luxuries. 

Nerds, like myself, will probably have little interest in a pricey console with much less customization options and specs that still fly well below a decent rig. On the other end of the spectrum, more casual consumers are unlikely to be swayed by specs (as the mentioned PS5 Pro sales percentage would also indicate). That leaves a rather small demographic somewhere in the middle; people who find regular consoles a tad too weak but don't want the "hassle" of traditional PC-gaming on a large screen.

Hey, I could be wrong as hell, won't be the first time. But looking at how the overall market sentiment across the entertainment industry is now, the Helix concept seems like a ill fit. 

For the regular player that's not a big leap though. Lighting models without RT are very good and most people don't care about the accuracy of reflections.

It will be interesting to see what it can do, yet its not a game changer. Same with native 4K and 120 fps. 1440p is more than sufficient for couch gaming as well as 60 fps for controller aiming. 

As a PC it will be useful, 120fps mouse aiming, sitting closer to be able to see native 4K. Yet as a console hybrid it won't impress unless games actually start using the extra memory and power for more advanced games with full destructible environments, hundreds of independent characters on screen, growing evolving worlds. Which likely won't happen with Switch 2 around as most popular console.

Thus I don't think it will fare any better than a PS5 Pro when it comes to the console crowd.

There's just little to no benefit to native 4K 120 fps on a couch. The appeal will have to be access to Steam. It will fully depend on the price how competitive Helix will be compared to deals on pre-build PCs. The PC enthusiasts can likely build cheaper and better by the time Helix gets to shelves. It's always already close with subsidized consoles when they launch and MS wasn't planning on subsidizing Helix.

Gaming at 120 fps, with a controller on a couch is game changing.  I think 60 fps becomes the new 30 fps, once consoles gamers start getting a taste.

For you maybe. I don't feel the difference between 60, 90, 120 fps games in VR when it comes to controls. Sure 90/120 looks slightly better without reprojection but as far as controls go, the polling rate / tracking stays the same. 

But who knows, 75% of players prefer performance mode according to Mark Cerny, yet 120fps mode in GT7 is considered niche. (But you need a newer TV for that)

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/gt7-different-performance-playing-at-60hz-and-120hz.426123/

Not a game changer, but some prefer it

"I haven't noticed and difference in my lap times, but for a long while I played at 60hz. Was totally happy with it. Then some random day I was in the settings menu and noticed 120hz was an option, so I turned it on. The game felt strange at first. Too fluid, too much like a simulation. I kind of forced myself to continue to use 120hz even though it was strange. Now 120hz is all I use. I still have not gotten any faster because of it."

It's different from stepping back down to 30 fps. I don't notice a difference at all between 120 fps and 90 fps games on PSVR2, notice the difference with 60fps games due to reprojection, but not with GT7 on pro which has it's own motion vector reprojection (frame insertion) that feels exactly the same as 120fps native games to me. Yet where Firmament drops down from 60 fps to 30fps on PSVR2 it's very noticeable.


It's diminishing returns again, like 1440p is good enough from the couch over native 4K, so performance mode 60fps over 30fps becomes the deciding factor. With 60fps to 120fps the difference is much smaller, so perhaps RT mode will be preferred in that case or rather cheaper hardware.

I can't speak about VR but for something like RE4, 120 fps is beyond noticeable, I can even see it in my accuracy report at the end of sections.

Any TV made in the last 5 years is likely 120 hz, it isn't rare.

People will get addicted to 120 fps once it becomes the norm. 

30 fps can go **** itself.  60 fps will be the new 30 fps.