Does Fullframe matters?

When I was a mirrorless camera user and when I was in the m4/3 format, I have to admit I try to adjust my shooting so the end results looks like a Fullframe sensors. In the end, the result seems to be ok until I use the true fullframe sensor. It is hard to explain in words, the fullframe do look more pleasing and to get a creamy background is much more easier. I can still get creamy background even on a compact camera, but more effort and thoughts are required. The below photo of the butterfly with the nice creamy background was easy (100mm f2.8) to achieve even I was standing quite far from the subject. If I am using OM-D (m4/3), i may need to move in further with a 60mmf2.8 lens.(equivalent-120mm)

Other advantages of the Fullframe(FF) have been discussed and compared many times. The immediate advantage for me, if the FF is able to pull back the exposure even if it is 2 or 3 stops under/over due to the higher dynamic range.

With the new Sony A7/A7r Fullframe mirrorless, it will again set many photographers into thinking. It does matters. The fullframe output is now at almost same body size as a Olympus EM-1 (m4/3 sensors).
Some may be quick to hammer that the lens for A7 system will be huge and has no significant size saving but I bet the lure of Fullframe will be great as the price of the A7 with same sensor as D610/D600 is much cheaper than the DSLR.

For me I will still be holding on to my D600 mainly due to available low priced but good quality lens in the Nikon lineup. For me, when I go out to buy a camera system, I usually will hunt for the lens I need for my shooting style and if the price is ok vs the quality before choosing the camera body. So lens choices are important for me.

With the A7/A7r, the scene of photography just like when Olympus launched E-p1, will change. I believe the DSLR segment will be open to more FullFrame models with smaller/cheaper body.