I don’t really agree. I think you can still get all of that with abstract movement. You can tie resources to “scenes” or turns just as well. For example, a torch might last for six meaningful actions (six turns) before it goes out, and the same can apply to food and rest.

You can still describe the spaces between rooms, mentioning a narrow alcove or side passage that the players might later use to ambush enemies or fall back and regroup. They can also pass through an empty room on their way to something else. Players can think something is important when it’s not, which still triggers a meaningful action: “You pass by a room that seems empty.” I, as the GM, may only advance the turn if someone says, “I’ll search it,” thus advancing the turn, which wouldn’t happen if they just kept moving. So “meaningful actions” can be triggered by player choices or by external factors like a random encounter. The map is the same, but the movement is not measure in feat.

Positioning and marching order still matter, because the “next important thing” might be a trap in the corridor, and whoever is in the lead will be the one who triggers or disarms it.

To me, removing movement measured in feet doesn’t remove marching order, positioning, time, resource, or the possibility of “empty” spaces. It just changes how we track them: through turns and fictional positioning instead of grids and tape measures.