I tend to avoid vsync, so I am glad it's not there.
I only turn vsync off if it affects the mouse usage (like it did in witcher 2 on PC for example, bad coding)
It's a personal preference, I guess console games could simply offer the option, preferably a system wide setting. I rather have a stable picture with lower fps than 2 parts of different frames on the screen. I play on a 144hz screen so the drop isn't that bad and v-sync makes it either 72, 48, 36, 28.8 or 24 fps. Actually I play at 20.6, 18, 16, 14.4 fps in FS 2020, maximizing fidelity. At 144hz it's only 6.9 ms to wait for the next opportunity.
Input lag shouldn't be an issue with v-sync (I only had that problem with TW2), controller polling and engine updates should be (and usually are) independent of output frame rate. But yep, you do have to 'wait' up to 16.7 ms longer to see the result if a 60fps game on a 60hz screen drops a frame. That still looks less annoying to me than a big tear at the top of the screen.
Didn't most games have soft lock last gen? Cap at 30, but allowed to tear briefly when going under? Is that the current problem, that the brief going under is not that brief anymore or is v-sync completely off.