I don't think we'll see one, but I'm not against them - assuming no social contamination a la Wiztards/OPCAT and well-reasoned about.

Fundamentally I believe Bitcoin's use as a permissionless payment network (as opposed to gold 2.0) is hindered by capital gains tax and general disinterest, not lack of OP codes.

Obviously in theory one day that can change and it'd be good to have the primitives necessary for scaling that MoE use-case should it happen but not my first rodeo. The likelihood of sophisticated tech getting added to Bitcoin actually being used the way anyone predicts is almost zero, the scammer-to-bitcoiner ratio is way out of whack among proponents of these upgrades (meaning that's the use case that'll actually get fleshed out - NFTs and other scams rather than coinpools/ARK etc). There's non-zero risk of any upgrade/unintended consequences (learnt my lesson post Segwit).

tldr: if something like CTV can happen in a fairly non-contentious way then it's likely no more scary that CLTV/CSV. I would love Symmetry. But I'm basically not under any illusion that unlocking this stuff would change the way people use Bitcoin. Currently almost no one ever uses Bitcoin as a permissionless payment network compared to the millions using it as Gold 2.0 and it is currently trivial and cheap to do so.

The desire for this stuff just doesn't exist, and if it were to in the future there's a 99% chance that no one can handle the complexity involved and they just resort to centralized solutions - this is why I am not fussed if nothing progresses here.

Final point - adding new OP codes rugs devs attempting to build on what we have already. It takes years for the ecosystem to adapt after each change, that's a significant and not always obvious cost.