I want 4K for VR. That way I could actually see stuff in the distance and SDE shouldn't be an issue anymore. So as an VR enthusiast, I have to disagree.

Absolutely agree. Just like 1080p wasn't worth it yesterday, or how 720p was the day before. HD has just been a big fad anyway. Let's just stop progress since we apparently reached peak 10 years ago.

It's already a travesty that devs have to force themselves to make games in 1080p, with textures no less. All a useless drag on performance. And who decided 30fps was so great? Let's go back to 24fps, works great for movies. That's a 25% performance gain just like that.That way we can finally have the cheapest consoles with the best games, now that devs can finally focus on gameplay rather than useless graphics and their tedious optimizations.

The sad part is that some people would seriously say that

I think it depends what developers are attempting to do.

For example, for most studios the primary focus is base PS4 and X1 hardware. That's the cheapest and most common hardware. If a developer is designing a game to achieve around 900p-1080p on base hardware, then it can see a significant resolution boost on the premium hardware. Most notably, 4K on X1X in a fairly regular basis.

The mid-gen upgrade don't always just improve resolution, sometimes they do improve textures (X1X primarily) and graphics settings as well. Some games on premium consoles stick to 1080-1440p for better graphics and performance, which is what you're basically asking for. Its all dependent on the developers and sometimes they give users options, that's ideal in my opinion.

Even if you feel 4K is overrated, the mid gen upgrades do offer significant visual improvements on any screen.

I'm talking more general releases. VR has its own set of requirements, both in regards to FPS and resolution

Did you even read the OP? The majority of my argument is about graphics. I don't know where you got the idea of stopping progress... its simply a debate on where progress is most appreciable and actually leaves a lasting impression. 

I'd rather much shinier graphics at a 1080p/1440p, considering the jump to 4k to me isn't that impressive despite the massive drain on resources.

Naturally it's different for VR due to the high fov.

Normally a TV you watch at between 20 to max 40 degrees fov. 40 degrees is pretty close, 6.5 ft from a 65" screen. Even if you practically sit on top of the tv at 4ft distance, you're fov is still 'only' 60 degrees.

VR currently sits at 110 degrees fov, still on the low side as 150 is better suited to human vision. At 110 fov any 4K screen will still look worse than a 1080p screen. If you're used to the normal recommended seating distance of 30 degrees fov for 1080p, you would need almost an 8K screen (per eye) for VR to get the same perceived resolution.

Here's one of those fov calculators
https://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

True, but VR is already impressive as fuck even with dat blurry 1080p. Things just in front of you look absurdly real, especially in games with great graphics like The London Heist. I would be fine with 4K for next generation. Not perfect, but a big step up from 1080p. But for 4K to be used in VR, the console needs to push 4K on flat games rather easily. As VR games have to be rendered twice and need 90 fps (or at the very least 60 fps) a console that only handles 1440p with 30 fps or something simply would lack the horsepower to make VR in 4K possible. Games would have to be scaled down way too much and stuff. That's why I would like to see 4K becoming the new baseline. It would help VR indirectly, if you know what I mean. I have some trouble explaining exactly what I want to say, sorry. =P

Agreed.  Its the easiest spec to market.  

Plus, we've all been conditioned to think about resolution over the last 15 years or so, since HDTVs became a mass market thing.  

On a TV in the livingroom 4K is not needed. High dynamic range is more important. On a computer monitor that you usually sit within 50-60 cm it has more appeal.