I was brought up in a large 3 bed Victorian terrace. I say large as most of the rooms were big, with high ceilings. It had a lot of the original features like crown moulding and ceiling roses, tiled hallway, fireplace etc. However - the kitchen was small and poky, the front and back gardens/yard were small, it was damp and had woodlice and slugs and silverfish. It was quite solid in some ways (thicker walls than a new build, floorboards didn’t creak etc) but when I was a teen, the outside layer of bricks of the front wall started leaning outwards, and we had to have the entire skin taken off and rebuilt. Admittedly, it wasn’t a gracious 19th century villa - it was cheap-ish northern terrace on a main road - but it put me off period properties.
We now live in a 4 bed house built in the late 1990s. It has a drive that fits 3 cars comfortably, largish front and back gardens, no damp, no insects, no structural issues (so far, touch wood!). Yes, the ceilings are lower, and the rooms are smaller (though there are more of them - we have a generous kitchen/diner/family room, a study, a playroom and a sitting room downstairs as well as more bedrooms and bathrooms) and there aren’t any period features (though there is a working fireplace, not that we use it because of particulates). We’re on the outskirts of town, walking distance from the centre but without any passing traffic.
I do get that I’m not comparing like with like - the house I grew up in would sell for about a quarter or less than our current house. But it’s hard to get the image of the slug trails out of my head when I think of period properties.
Looking at rightmove just now for our small town, house built in the last 50 years are generally on for more than the older houses, but there’s also a lot more of the newer homes for sale, so it’s hard to compare. There’s several 4 bedroom homes for sale built since 1970, but nothing older of that size.