Another explanation is that they simply don’t know how much they’d enjoy an alternative experience, and don’t want to risk that it could be even worse. Colloquially, we’d call this the “devil I know” situation–I’m wondering if there’s a psychological basis for this as well.

The other thing you described sounds kind of like what’s known as “the endowment effect” and may very well be in play, though in drafting these stories I’ve found that they make better reads when I stick to one concept at a time.

Regarding the $50 cost, though, that’s still beside the point. You’re still looking at paying $50 for something that has no value to you or at least less than $50 worth of value. It’s still irrational to spend it.

This makes sense for pre-orders where the 10 dollars is actually sunk, but I believe Gamestop (the main offender) will return your money with no questions asked if you go down to the store and say you decided not to buy it or got it somewhere else. The sunk cost you’re talking about is sort of related to throwing good money after bad in stocks etc, but when you’re able to get the money refunded, I don’t think it really applies as much.

I think it might have more to do with two other concepts. One is that you even though the money isn’t actually sunk, you have a perception that the game is partially yours and if you think about buying that game, you will most likely return to the place you pre-ordered it. Also, it modifies the perceived cost of the game. Paying 10 dollars is no big deal. Then, when the game releases, the perceived cost of the game is 50 dollars at the Gamestop you pre-ordered at and 60 dollars everywhere else.