Next gen won't be 30 FPS nor 60. It'll be VRR.
Stop trying to gatekeep "good videogames" through the one feature you like, people. We should have grown beyond that by now.
...
As much as I'm looking forward to VRR (I've been dreaming of this tech for 15yrs), the only issue is that it isn't a feature devs can rely on being readily available any time soon.
VRR won't be prevalent or dominant; and certainly not standard, for some time, so they will always have to provide a capped 30fps or 60fps mode if they don't want a stuttery experience for console users who don't have VRR.
Unless you're ok with gamers having a rough experience, it won't be reasonable to put out a game that
only runs at 40-50fps and relying on VRR to keep it smooth on the other end.
I expect we'll see 30fps remain dominant (though somewhat less dominant) next-gen, but I also expect we'll see VRR as an option on ~"60fps" performance modes that gives you a few extra frames when they're available and tidies up the rough edges when it's below. Hopefully as the tech advances we'll see the VRR range in displays go from ~48-120, to something like ~25-120; and the same VRR option could be applied to the 30fps modes (as long as it doesn't become a major developer crutch for sub 30fps drops).
To summarise, it's not reasonable to mandate VRR for a smooth experience; and I expect there to remain a ~30fps and/or ~60fps mode as default with VRR as an option to tighten up the experience. I don't expect many games out there doing ~45fps for eg. and that being the only option.
Hopefully by next, next gen, it'll be reasonable to mandate VRR for a smooth experience (just as we pretty much mandate HD as a minimum now). Of course, you still don't want massive swings, particularly at the very low end, as VRR doesn't fix major swings in response.