Technical people like to ignore branding to the point that it becomes ridiculous. I'm not calling you out, BTW, just using you as an example. Audi vs BMW... does it really matter? There are minor differences here and there, but really it's another place where you're paying for the brand. When it comes to performance/build quality/technology, a Toyota Camry is by and large the same as any luxury car you can buy. The difference is the brand name and the "feel" (which is hard to quantify, so much so that it kinda comes back to the value of the brand).
When I bought my first luxury car, I had friends recommending an Audi. Seemed like marginally better value for the money, a little better MPG, some marginally nicer interior features, etc. But in the end I went with the BMW because every time I look at the A4, all I see is a Jetta for twice the price. The fact that Audi is owned by VW and the cars are based off the same platform is a turn-off for me. It has nothing to do with the features or the performance or the "feel" of the car... it's just a brand image in my mind. A Lexus is an expensive Toyota. An Audi is an expensive VW. But a BMW is a BMW, they don't make anything else. My 3-Series isn't anything but a 3-Series.
I know that sounds ridiculous, but when it comes to premium products, it's not always easy to quantify why you like one over the other. A lot of the time it comes down to irrational things like adjacent brands or the way it makes you "feel". Everyone can discount that as much as they want and say JVC has better sound for half the price of Beats, but it doesn't change the fact that the people buying Beats don't care about the sound, they care about the intangible benefits that the brand gives them.
I have yet to see an AWD Jetta with all the features same generation A4 has. But from the purely branding point of view BMW does have that advantage of not sharing their parts bin with "lesser" brands. If you look purely at the specs, it's a tougher choice, although BMWs might be somewhat faster for the money...
For what it's worth, the Camry (an excellent car) is front wheel drive and many luxury cars are rear or all wheel drive. This makes a difference in driving dynamics.
Fun thing is that rear wheel drive is cheaper, and harder to drive ... and yet you're right about the luxury versions using that.
Almost everybody agrees they're harder to drive, and that the drivetrain is much cheaper (because the driven wheels do not rotate, so the mechanics are incredibly simpler)
And you can say, that makes it less likely to break. Technically true, but this is not something that breaks often, nor can you reasonably expect it to break (essentially only under enough mechanical stress to be bending/breaking the axle (a thick all-metal pipe), and at that point I guarantee this won't be the worst problem you have). It's just not the weak point of any car, so it won't ever make the difference between a car that keeps driving and one that does not.
Which makes this weird, because you're paying a lot more for an objectively worse product, which causes more mistakes in driving and is therefore more dangerous, for some bragging rights. I'm probably a geek because this just seems incredibly stupid to me.
Sweet deal for the manufacturers though: charge a lot more for a much cheaper product that's also simpler to design.
