On that basis I suppose it's fair to ask what your definition of "fun" is? For those with the means, fun can be obtained doing crazy things with a Greyhound bus in a parking lot or a retired military jet fighter in uncontrolled airspace. If the disposable revenue is adequate the pleasures of any high ticket item can be experienced while calling what's being done "fun". For those of lessor means a go cart ride on a Saturday afternoon provides the same function. It's all relative.
My perspective has civilian drones as being purpose built, using tiers of affordability and reliability to entice buyers. I don't see the common manufacturers caring all that much about producing a high quality product, regardless of the price. What I see are manufacturers that have done a lot of data mining to establish the maximum price a large segment of people will pay for certain feature sets to produce products with just enough reliability to cause a large number people to buy them. For mass product sales targeting a limited market, production costs have to achieve the absolute minimum and doing that means some things will be sacrificed. The quality that assures reliability is usually the first thing to go. Those seeking a high reliability platform for any purpose would not buy anything typically discussed in common drone forums because they know they would be buying products designed around a law of minimums. Because of that they would spend a lot more to obtain a purpose built machine or system with much higher reliability and consistent performance. The more forward thinking would look at more expensive systems that provided a lot of expansion diversity. However, those people are not in the majority, which drives prices higher still due to lack of manufacturing scale. OTOH, those willing to make a few sacrifices while understanding design limitations would buy lessor quality, more or less "disposable" products, in order to quickly satisfy current needs.
You asked if i thought the 920+ was worth the money. The answer requires some qualification because it must be tailored to the individual. At what I paid for mine, roughly $4,400.00, it depends. If I lacked the ability to use a business to claim it as a tool deduction I'd say no. having the ability to depreciate a business asset evened things out quite a bit. At the current selling price the 920 Plus is a great value for what it can do for those willing to accept it for what it is. The original 920 sold for over $7,000.00 and for what it could do at that place in time it was an excellent value for those that needed those capabilities. The nearest price/performance comparisons at the time had selling prices, with cameras, starting at over $12,000.00. On a cost/benefit basis I don't see an Inspire 2, H-520, or H Plus being worth what they are currently selling for. For those to achieve what I view as a fair value their price would need to fall buy at least 1/3. I don't believe any system that locks the owner into using brand specific accessories being worth a high selling price. Nor do I believe commonly marketed "high sales volume" drones to have the quality they are being advertised as having.
So define your concept of fun and your perceived function needs and proceed from there. If you can afford anything, and afford to replace it immediately after a crash, you can have and do pretty much whatever you want. At that level there's not much need to qualify a purchase.
