But its not just an engine specification, its a power unit specification. I agree that the V6 aspect of it is silly, but thats more about fitment and overall impact on chassis design then anything. Every other aspect of the power unit has massive real world relevance. All the ERS, power sortage, power delievery of this ERS power etc will be priceless in the years to come.
True, but what it loses is the marketing by association aspect, which is what the mass market car makers really like. For Touring Cars and Rallying its pretty easy, as the cars look pretty much like the road cars they are based on. It doesn't really matter whats going on inside, people still recongnise the body shape.
F1 cars don't look like road cars, so for road car makers to get good marketing value they need to find some sort of link. For performance car makers like Ferrari its about the results, but for mass market makers its more difficult. Simply doing well on track with a car with your badge on it isn't good enough.
The marketing for the I4 engine format basically wrote itself. Just look at how many car makers have 1.6 I4's. Imagine the advertising, "Buy the new Clio RS, with the same engine Vettel won his 5th World Title with!" The I4 was massively marketable for a lot of car makers. And its cross discipline too, WRC and WTCC also run 1.6 I4 turbos.
The V6 has lost that. As most car maker involvement in F1 is going to be defined by the marketing manager, its a lot harder for F1 to attract them without a directly marketable component. We are back at the stage of just marketing by having a badge on something that wins.
And its been shown by the new engine regulations resulting in F1 moving from 4 engine suppler to just 3 (initially), and 2 of those 3 being companies with little to no interest in the I4 format. The rules failed to attract the market the FIA were going for.