There is a bit of that at least for me, but it is a mixed bag. Yes, pier and beam can handle shifting soil better than the modern foundations we see around my area, but most everything from an insulation standpoint is extremely inferior to modern construction. Also, airflow in houses retrofitted for central air conditioning is suboptimal. The woodworking made from hand tools is something we will never see again in middle class homes though. On the whole, I'd give the nod to a modern home both for maintainability and efficiency, with the notable exception of foundations. If I lived somewhere basements were normal in new builds, even that might swing towards a new build. But old houses are still just more interesting, the way a 60s roadster is more interesting than a modern one, despite being worse in every way functionally.

Thanks for sharing your thought. There's old car fans but not much old house fans. For Japan, the new earthquake resistance standards was introduced in 1981 so not all prior houses are guaranteed to safe. Old houses could be interesting but almost all 1981 house isn't interesting but just obsoleted. Insulation is also a huge factor.

One datapoint: In Germany, Altbau (old construction) apartments are quite sought after especially in cities. Whether that's because of their location (older apartments tending to be in historical areas) or their construction quality or just fashion, I don't know.

Houses from 1981 aren't very interesting here either. Right now people seem to like 1960s houses or 1920s and older.