Yes I've found that odd. 4K HDR TVs are super expensive so people are going to want to pair it with the cheapest device?

Why would the casual buyer want to get a console they aren't going to use - instead of a sleek, small, DVD player that cost almost the same.  Specially when you factor in someone wanting to use a remote (which the DVD player comes with) instead of a controller.

Also as far as players go - do some of them have more features than others? Better upscalers, more settings etc?

Well... Saying it will be a little more than the x1s is rumored at best... And its not like x1s can't lower its price to... I doubt 4k compatibility drives up the cost of the hardware very much.

You seem to be placing way too much stock on UHD movies.

Blu-ray didn't make the PS3 beat the 360.

TV TV TV didn't make the XB1 beat the PS4 (alongside all the great media functions the XB1 had)

it's the ssme thing here. At the same price the PS4 will beat the XB1 simply from being a game console. It will be even worse if its cheaper. 

4k and UHD movies or not, the PS4 is the better gaming console. When people and MS learn what Sony learnt they will realize that you don't have to be more than a gaming console to be the best selling gaming console. Great take should be used to making a great gaming console, then carried over to other features. Not shoehorned in to add some sort of perceived value. 

That was sonys problem with the PS3.... lots of perceived value. Look where that got them. Ive probably said this before. But it would have done MS more if the made a $200 XB1s or even lower. That to me would have been the smarter thing to do. 

Are they? I thought they came down in price

https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN40KU6300-40-Inch-Ultra-Smart/dp/B01DUTL4OI/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1472611943&sr=1-2&keywords=4k+hdr+tv

We were talking about 4K HDR tvs though

http://ca.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/ku6300
The range of colors the Samsung TV can display is only good enough for Rec. 709 content. Sending an HDR signal or settings the color space to native will not give you a wider color gamut.
The Samsung TV has an 8 bit panel and processing as can be noticed in our gradient test pattern. The anomalies won't be such an issue in regular content except for some banding that can be seen in some scenes.

That's not a 4K HDR tv. Supporting HDR input is not the same as being able to display it.

I dunno, but going by the slims track record

I find it quite complicated myself. For example here is an answer someone gave to "is this TV HDR".

" It has HDR Premium - not HDR1000 like some of the upper tier models. This set CAN display HDR content, however it does not meet the HDR10 industry standard so it is much better than a set without any HDR, but not quite as good as sets that are HDR10 compliant."

So it is better than a regular TV - but not a true HDR TV.

I would also like to see the "cheapest" true HDR tv. All the ones I've seen have been quite expensive. I'm not sure if I am just looking in the wrong places, or if "true HDR" is really this expensive so far.

But then you have to take into account the "resolution chart". The you must sit this close/have a TV this big to notice the difference. So if you are getting a smaller TV you have to sit closer to get the effect (I think).

How close would you have to sit to get the "true effect" of a TV less than 50 inches?