Eventually I believe an accurate consensus will be reached.
I'm not concerned with consensus, much less try to define what an 'accurate' consensus is. My photography is driven by my own style and preferences, and it's only as good as I'm able to execute based on all the steps from camera to print, using my own hardware, software, settings, inks, papers, profiles, etc, etc. The world would be boring if any given camera led to pics of a similar nature.
For now, I get my best b/w results from an M8.2, not an M9, having tested the latter. The M9
sometimes helped to yield better color results, but that wasn't universal.
I won't make any judgments, let alone any purchase, of the new M until everything is finalized, any potential bugs are sorted, and I've had time to test (probably rental) by making my own prints based on my own pics. What's the rush? The world is full of pics that I can take now with cameras that nobody but me knows I use.
My hope is that the b/w and color output from the new M allows me to at least achieve the quality of results I get now. If so, the fact that it may be weather sealed (allowing more flexibility actually capturing pics), have a quieter shutter (allowing more access and and a more film-M-like experience), have 2m frame lines (like my M8.2, allowing for more accurate framing for my typical subjects), and allow for use of longer lenses, will all be gravy. So, too, might I appreciate the faster processing and longer battery life.
None of those additional benefits will matter, though, if the IQ isn't adequate for my needs. But I sure don't need any internet consensus to inform my decision.
Jeff