I'm looking for people who have done both "budget" trips, and other trips where they have "splurged" -- and wondering your thoughts on both, and if you had just as much or more fun with your budget resorts and you did with your splurge resorts. In the future, whether or not money is an object for you, would you go less often to save for a "better" resort, or if you could go more often - would you settle for the budget. Also - do your types of trips change when you go with others?
My experience is all across the board. Our big splurge (El Dorado Royale) -- I do feel like that was, in ways,kind of a waste of money for us. On the other hand, it was a nice experience, and gives us one more level of things to look for in a resort. Our biggest budget resort (Reef Club) was not our worst, although we're not running back to it anytime soon. Another one we spent good money on was the Palladium, and we both agree that was totally worth it. (we did room upgrade, as well) We tried to pick a resort that would cater to 'something for everyone' last time, when we went with several couples -- but really feel we chose wrong with the Iberostar Tucan. (Great for families, possibly others, not for us at all)
I'm all over these boards talking about the one I really liked for Adult Only -- and that was Golden Parnassus, BUT we did do the highest room level there, too.
So for us, I guess it has not really mattered how much we paid, in the overall scheme of whether we really liked it or not -- but then, we aren't people who really want or need luxury or expect and want to be pampered. Not that I think there is anything at all wrong with those who do --- everyone does have different vacation expectations and desires.
I guess the reason I am thinking about this now is that I'm planning on going back to the Golden Parnassus at some point, but I also want to try out the VIM. I am just hoping that I will feel the extra money we are paying to stay at the VIM, over the GP, will feel worth it, to us.