Hmm, for me (and my 'high-end' is somewhat similar to what Claire and Mo and Mochi have mentioned upthread, mutatis mutandis for my country's retail environment), I find that a better quality garment does seem more satisfying and for longer. That said, I think the causality of this goes both ways.
On the one hand, a garment whose quality feels better to the hand and eye alike, which fits well, is comfy through the day, stays put the way it should, flatters the skin as well as the figure is... calming. It actually soothes me enough to stop me 'shopping for comfort'. If it's in a colour I enjoy that also looks good on me, it also stops me 'shopping for colour'---which is a variation of 'shopping for comfort' in that I can get moody about colour and can use colour to treat said moods too!
On the other hand, since I do work with a very tight budget, even if I'm buying the better-quality garment at 50% off (there are one or two brands that are mainstays of my wardrobe that I do, however, buy almost exclusively on sale!), I'm still extra nitpicky about putting down the cash/card. Because it represents a larger outlay, I'm fussier about the returns. I'd not explore the fall and drape, the seams and *exact* shade of a cheaper T-shirt as much as the 'better' knit top. And this extra pickiness in turn almost guarantees extra satisfaction---which is not about the quality per se, but about how happy the garment makes me, how much more satisfying it is for my needs, lifestyle, style. It ends up more fulfilling.
To approach the food analogy another way, the better quality garment is a more filling meal as well as one that satisfies the appetite (colour, texture, flavours=style) better.
So yeah, I can skip the snack (cheap refills) or at least delay one longer...
Of course, what exactly is a 'filling' quantity and how soon you can eat again is a very individual thing---depends on your physiology, right, even before taste and budget appear? Similarly, I suspect we all have a built-in comfort zone that is determined by wardrobe logistics, irrespective of style and budget. I'm not precisely a minimalist, and I do get easily bored---but I also get thoroughly irritable and overwhelmed when I have a huge bunch of quashed-together garments to choose from, and I certainly don't mind wearing my favourite outfits ad nauseam (from other folks' perspective).
This, however, means extra wear and tear, hence quicker replacement of favourites than if I had several nearly-as-nice pieces. Because not only does wear spread over more items, but also the nearly-as nice is not reached for as often as the favourites.
I find the boredom, in my case, is more easily and manageably---both from space and budget perspectives---alleviated by accessories, especially physically smaller ones, than a whole bunch of garments. So scarves and earrings are things I keep looking out for (though in recent years I've gotten pickier and less frequent in shopping for those too). But I can now do with fewer shoes, jeans, T-shirts than I used to. I find a 'louder' (better) bang for my buck means I don't need as *many* bangs for my buck!
I do repeat purchases of similar items if they are frequent elements of my outfits---jeans (different styles), skirts (several different colours, similar style and fabric), closed neutral flat shoes. But I still find I can pass up the back-up item when the one great item that nearly maxes my budget also yet looks and feels great on. Case in point: the red skinnies I bought this year which I'd have loved to duplicate in blue, budget allowing. Yet I found I could pass the blue up because the red ones were so close to perfect for my needs that it just felt... so vastly satisfying that even double the satisfaction did not tempt me to overspend! It's like being lulled into a soporific state after a HUGE meal.
