I agree that it would be nice, to see a higher number. A straight upgrade is always better. That was what originally kept me from getting a 6D II instead of an 80D - paying more for getting the same or less (especially base ISO DR) with regards to anything but sensor size.My ideal would be an R5.5 with about 30-35 MP priced halfway between the two. The R6 pixel count won't satisfy me, certainly not for that price, so the R5 it is. (My fallback was the RP--yeah, not an exciting resolution, but so inexpensive it doesn't matter. Heck, I might still pick one up as a backup. Since it takes the same batteries as my T6i and M6-II I wouldn't even need to buy a spare battery for it.) It'll be painful for a while but long after I've forgotten the money and returned to a non-Ramen-based diet, I think I'll be using a wonderful piece of equipment.
The camera I am most exited about is the high res R. That one will be a true replacement for an APS-C body in terms of reach. And reach is the only thing I would need high MP for. For landscape, I usually do Panoramas anyway. And for general use, the 20 MP FF with (not confirmed yet) the high detail low pass filter should give similar or better detail compared to my 80D.
Since the R5 would be about equal in reach to my 80D and I can't justify spending money on a proper Tele anyway, I can very much see an R6 and 800 mm f/11 in my future. It just makes more sense, once the GAS is put aside. That combo matches the reach I currently have well enough, but improves literally every other aspect. Except for price, of course, but one has to do something to stimulate the economy anyway