Gun companies are like any other company - they are there to make money. There is money to made in marketing lower cost firearms to those who want a budget firearm (such as I did when I bought my Rem 710 in 2004) and there are those who wish to have the more pleasing (and expensive) aesthetics of wood and blued steel and slick actions. One one hand folks will argue a firearm is "just a tool", but on the other they promote that tool should be finely crafted. A tool is a hammer also. I don't need shiny metal and polished wood to drive nails, just as many don't need (or wish to pay for) certain features that add nothing to the functionality of the tool.
I can appreciate a fine firearm, but I'm going to weight those pricier features against what they offer me and what benefit they provide. I could go buy a nicer deer rifle in the $750+ range that would come with some nice wood and have a slick bolt operation, but it would not do the job any better than my plastic stock and not-so-smooth bolt other than look a lot nicer and get more admiration for aesthetics from anyone who wished to hold it. I'd rather spend my money on other things - to each his own.
On one end firearm companies are selling for the budget conscious, but on the other end they are just selling vanity - an overpriced firearm that looks good but does nothing or offers nothing to the average hunter but shiny bells and whistles - just like car companies with their gadgets and features. It's the "cup holder" situation - this year's model doesn't get you there any better than last year's, but there's two more cup holders!