In reply to Mr-Cowdrey:
People have different approaches to gear. Some will strive for 'perfection', some will like to experiment, some will stick with what they know, and some will just get on with it. And some are combinations of all those... I think you've described one subset of people, which is those who want 'the best', for one or more reasons...
I don't read the comics any more, and don't trawl gear shops much, either, so I'm not influenced by adverts, and certainly not influenced by what 'role models' might use (I've never been that much of a 'fan' of anyone). My fetish is for trying different things out, and looking for value for money, functional gear, wherever it comes from. Which means that I won't buy stuff from Arc'teryx or Jottnar, and only buy Patagonia stuff when it's heavily discounted (although I could easily afford it). I'm perfectly happy with buying and using stuff from Lidl, Aldi and Decathlon, provided I've assessed it and decided it's fit for purpose; most of the stuff I've bought in the last couple of years has come from Decathlon.
Only a certain select few items ever get worn out, as most get replaced with the next thing I've found cheap and want to try. The things that get worn out have to really good (for me, at least). If I look back through my wardrobe, I'd say the one thing that has generally improved over the years is design; jackets are better tailored, with carefully cut panels, pockets in the tight place, well-designed, helmet-compatible hoods with wired peaks, etc. Or maybe that's just how my collection has grown, as I've come to appreciate these nuances... Even Paramo have slimmed the fit on some of their jackets... It has to be said that many of these improvements have come from the top-end guys like Arc'teryx and Patagonia, and have filtered down.
I do like things that fit nicely, and I know that, aside from the purely functional aspect, there's also an image thing going on, however much I like to think I'm completely rational in my choice of gear. I like to think that image is an internally-generated one, but I suspect it is acquired by osmosis. So I probably am influenced by adverts and shop displays after all...
In the past, I've opted for muted 'natural' colours like greys, as I don't want to be visual pollution in the hills. But I found a cheap ReadyMix in 'Mango' a while back, so this has been my skiing shell of choice. Coincidentally, it colour-coordinates with a Berghaus Scorch PTP pullover (TKMaxx) and a Quechua winter base layer (in sale). Judging by outfits around me over New Year, it seems that orange is one of the new blacks, at least in the skiing world... I still can't see me wearing the mango ReadyMix when hillwalking; too much pollution... The 'Alpine Ninja' is black isn't great for photos (see threads passim), so adverts tend to use bright colours that are more photogenic. And most companies succumb to the 'colour trend predictions', hence the profusion of acid-coloured contrasting zips a couple of years ago.
The 'classic three-layer' setup of base layer, fleece & waterproof is only really 'classic' during the lifespan of breathable shell materials, and the 'soft shell revolution' can be considered a return to layering systems used prior to the development of breathable shell fabrics. Yes, we're spoilt for choice these days, partly due to the increasingly niche-oriented soft shells (no-one's found the 'classic' setup yet), and partly due to good old consumerism.
Does my choice of gear make me perform better? No. Does it make the experience more comfortable? Sometimes, if I've chosen wisely from the vast collection of gear...