I don't think I missed the OP at all. Even if a phone is $1000, its multi-purpose,is a one-off purchase and imo more value for money compared to a console that is locked down, tied to a TV and requires a subscription to function for multi-player.
Ok... so you want to talk about the purpose... what makes it essential, right?
You know you can buy a $300 phone that does 90% of what that $1200 phone does, right?
I just find this whole argument silly. You don't need to buy a $1200 phone, any more than most people need to buy a $2000 laptop, or a $200k car, or a $2k GPU...etc. A want becomes a need only when, in rare cases, that thing is integral to your life and survival, or, subjectively, the person doing the buying decides they want it.
And that's the key thing here, want it. Let people buy whatever they want, and let people not buy what they want... where this starts to get weird is when people who decide they can't afford it, or that it's out of their price bracket, start a campaign to make it look bad.
Eg. I hate that games cost $70, on principle that means I will not buy more than 3 -5 games at full price each year, so I will only buy the stuff that I really want or that are really good (to me). You don't see me going to start a boycott thread like I don't know this isn't the early 2000s anymore, where games cost $20M to make, and studios can break even or make a profit just by selling 1M copies of their game.
The hardware required to handle next-gen gaming... is steadily going up, or we just gonna pretend that even the Switch 2 handheld price didn't go up by 50% compared to the Switch 1? Or we pretending that we don't see the steady creep upwards over the last 20 YEARS in PC component pricing, especially when looking at the "console equivalent GPUs" that end up in consoles? Just silly to me.