My wife and I are also prioritizing a house over optimal savings (finishing off some loans in the next year or two and then save save save!). The way I personally see it is that the value of owning my own home in an area I love and will never leave >> having the maximum possible retirement balance. Yes, I could maximize savings and buy the home later, but for us those years lost are worth more than the $ we would gain. It's not just the satisfaction of owning a home, but also of slowly tinkering with it to make it truly yours, of establishing memories that are reinforced daily rather than dimmed by a future move (we're perfectly happy to never move), of truly becoming a part of a community, of having a place our children and grandchildren can return to time and again, of knowing that come hell or hyperinflation, we'll have a solid roof over our heads. And so forth.
Many of the math > all folks seem to think the above reasoning is befuddling, but I personally don't find enough satisfaction in watching my account balances go up to prioritize that over all else. I recently started a (controversial, but interesting) thread about getting a tattoo. Other things like artwork, vacations, etc., were (fairly, imo) brought up as comparable expenses. So far I've seen no compelling argument as to why any of those things are any different than buying a house when it's the sub-optimal play. Ultimately, I would argue that whatever provides the largest amount of sustainable happiness with the least negative impact on others will always be the most mustachian choice.
Besides, I don't anticipate FIRE being delayed by more than a couple years at most if we take this approach, and that is a trade-off we are more than willing to make.
