I feel like for the average joe 60fps is good enough.

120fps is nice, but it requires a lot of optimization to get anything advanced to run that high on a console, so while I can see some devs shooting for it (heck, even on Switch 2 some games do) I don't see it becoming the new baseline even on Helix/PS6.

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.

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.

Whats funny is the majority of Playstation 1st party games actually default to quality 30fps mode, which makes me look at that statistic (which was used to promote/announce PS5 Pro) a bit differently. Even as recent as Ghost of Yotei, you'll see the default mode is Graphics/30fps. If Playstation and Devs have this data wouldn't they set the default to performance?

My suspicion is most console gamers don't actually change the graphics/performance mode in a game and the 75% is based on a smaller percent who actually care to do this. Probably every game with options (bar GOW:Ragnarok if I'm correct) defaults to 30 because it creates a better first impression and then they leave it for the more core gamer to toggle to 60 if they care. Ragnarök is likely the exception because its performance and graphic modes essentially look the same. 

As far as the utilization of whatever power it has, I do wonder if it'll actually have games built for it like a console, or if it'll just get PC presets like say Steam Deck or Xbox Ally.

One of the key advantages of a console is that games can be tailored to the specific hardware, allowing for better results than you'd get on a PC of the same specs.