All those extra megapixels come at a cost. As an owner of a Canon 5DSr I know of what I speak from personal experience. Sure the resolution and details all those pixels produce is amazing but, as previously mentioned, you give up a lot for it. My D500, D7200 and 5DIV get used way more than my 5DSr because they are faster, create smaller image files and are a whole lot more practical and forgiving them the 50 megapixel camera. If I demand mind boggling detail then I use the 5DSr. A good example; I attended the Philadelphia flower show the other day. Did I use the 5DSr? No, I used my D7200 and 5DIV. The D7200 is much better with the available lighting and it's images are quite nice. If you don't want or need the advantages the fewer pixel cameras offer then get the more expensive one, but remember, you will be giving up useful features, and if you shoot RAW, you may need a faster computer with a lot more storage capacity. Those mega megapixel image files are huge.

Do you really think people are interested in common sense? More resolution and more investment is not going to make your photography much better.

Peer pressure, persuasion from sellers. GAS and a general lack of understanding of the science behind resolution are what is driving a lot of the hype about high resolution sensors.

If you don't routinely print large you probably don't need the extra resolution. If you absolutely have to have it, be prepared to invest heavily in better prime lenses because your current lenses, especially zooms, are probably inadequate.

Better yet, look into medium format. You get more resolution from old film cameras and lenses and a decent scanner than you are likely to ever see from the small format digital offerings. You might even learn more about photography than you will from an auto-everything digital.

For most of us, 24 MP is plenty and it's not going to make our existing kit of lenses look bad.

I can only speak on my behalf and I NEVER use Auto WB. I prefer to use a setting to approximate the lighting present on my subject and an example is Sunlight setting when the sun is shining.
For birds in flight I use a shutter speed that allows me to freeze action and that shutter speed has to be higher than the focal length of the lens I am using. If am using my 80-400 VR lens I know I need 1/500sec minimum shutter speed although 1/1000sec would be much better. At times I slow the shutter speed only for panning.

Debating between a Sony a7iii or a7Rii or a7Riii. I will shoot landscapes, street scenes, family activities. I’d concluded that the 24 MP a7iii would be the best choice but a salesman at Best Buy makes the point that I might need the 42 mp of the a7Rxxx for cropping photos. I won’t be printing large images, mostly veiwing via hi def monitor. There are a couple minor differences from the a7R to the a7 like touch screen, larger battery, etc but 42 vs 24 mp seems to be the most significant. Will the mega pixel size matter?