The difference in coffee is that the fancier geegaws are presented for aesthetic reasons, not improvements to the coffee.
No one is arguing -- or at least I haven't seen it argued -- that a $200 basket, or a $100 distribution tool, or a super-expensive knock box make better coffee that the basic models.
There's just a certain subset of home espresso people who want fancier things, or prettier things, for reasons external to efficacy. How does it look on the counter when I'm not using it? How pleasant is it to hold? Does it tickle that "finely machined object" thing in my brain?
For example, lots of people use the Weiss Distribution Technique on their espresso grounds. Simply put, you stir the coffee in the portafilter using a tool with several fine needles on it to reduce clumping and more evenly distribute the grounds. This has been experimentally proven to produce improvements in the shot.
BUT, critically, it doesn't matter how expensive the tool is. The DIY crowd buys acupuncture needles on Amazon and sticks 'em into a wine cork, which costs almost nothing. That works every bit as well as a $150 fancy one with a hand-tooled wooden handle and matching base, and no one argues differently. It's just that some people value aesthetics enough to pony up for the fancy option.
I mean, there are definitely people who run tests and check whether the $200 baskets result in better coffee — Lance Hendrick [1] is my favorite YouTuber for that kind of thing.
The question isn't whether it makes a marginally better espresso (it probably does); the question is whether it's the best bang for your buck.
For most people, it probably isn't.
For people who have Weber EG-1s on their coutertops (AFAICT, it was Weber with their Unifilter who started this wave of super-expensive baskets/portafilters?) and La Marzoccos / Decents? It might be!
I've never heard of that YouTube channel, but I loved his work in ALIENS.
(I prefer Hoffmann, and he definitely does the same thing -- ie, point out that some given object might be pretty, and it might do a fine job, but not enough of a BETTER job to justify its premium.)
Lance also accepts more freebies whereas Hoffmann pays for everything. it's because of this impeccable ethic which drove me to be a patron of his for a few years - though i think it's time to move to a smaller channel.
I don't know if it's a grift but it is absurd