Pardon my ignorance, but I fail to understand the fuzz about the subdivision. The Catmul-Clark subdivision does not use the normals, it does not care for curvature more than just one facet away. It does not perserve volume. It does not obey the laws of Physics of membranes. It is just an easy math process that can help to accomodate gross geometry variations. It is popular in graphical applications, but it is a cheapy method that has no physical background. 

Geometry definition is made trough vertices.  Additional facets generated from the available vertices do not add any detail. They just interpolate and blur existing definition.

With smoothing turned on for the existing compatible figures (V4 or Antonia) I do do not see vertex edges in my Poser Renders, even when they are in close detail. Yet, I hear morph developers complain the resolution is marginal if you want to add that level of detail that is visible in close-up shots.

A drawback of weight mapping is that you need to give information on the amount of bending for every vertex in the bend area. Consequently, if you reduce the number of vertices in a model, you need to store less weightmap information and preview generation could be faster. This is an advantage if the graphics card in the system is low-spec, or if the system has low memory. At render time, the additional work for the subdivision has to be done, and in the end the number of facets for rendering need not be different.

My conclusion is that I do not need subdivision for the modern figures. If I need anything on geometry it is simplification. If an image shows 10 figures none of them will be close enough to see any detail. Facets will be on pixel level. Geometry definition on a level suitable for close-up for all of them is a waste.  We had V3-RR, and the Poser 5 and 6 figures had low-res versions. Can I have them also for the new figures, pleez?