Personally, I am with mostly with thepupil although I would not try to predict RE pricing based on my thoughts.
We are in somewhat-close suburbs of Boston.
We talked about moving to exurbs for bigger-or-nicer house/more land/more forest or water/etc.
The problem is that infra does not move. So we'd lose (or be forced to drive way longer to):
- Tai Chi studio we go to, meditation place we go to
- PCP and medical specialists we go to
- restaurants
- other Boston culture, shopping, etc.
- friends
Ultimately, I don't think losing all of these are worth what we'd gain.
OT: why do American builders continue to build the 1930s/1950s esthetics SFHs? Unlike Europe there are no look restrictions and yet everything except multi-million custom houses look like they were plopped from a 1960s sitcom.
Lithuanians build nicer looking new houses than Americans... 
Agreed, you wouldn't want to lose these. That said, assuming you were close to your work before, would you now willing to be 30 minutes away from some of these needs if you could get an estate now for the same price, e.g. say with a farm, view, horses, heliport, airport, or something else you like? Maybe you have to go too far in your area, but do you think some small percentage of people might be willing to consider that option for their next house?
For each extra mile you're willing to add now, the options grow
quadratically with new options being available in area of size pi * (new_distance ^2 - old_distance^2). So, if you were willing to be only 5 miles away from these options before, you could cover only pi^25 square miles. Now, if you can go 20 miles, your options for living go up to pi^400 square miles. If you are willing to go 30 miles, your options for living have expanded to pi^900 square miles.
I feel the oligopoly power of the living options within pi^25 square miles has certainly diminished by the availability of living options in p^900 square miles, while keeping access to things that are important.
All it takes is a small percentage of people to start exercising this option of leveraging increased effective supply as 20% incremental supply can lead to moves in prices as 20% vacancy in Detroit showed us. Here, the effective supply has increased quadratically by many multiples not just 20%.