The pay to play is from the local tourism board to get them to come rate restaurants at all, so it isn't like specific restaurants can pay to get stars. Denver and Atlanta both paid recently and each got a pretty small number of stars, like 5 per city.
They used to actually publish a book for each region they went to, so Atlanta and Denver probably couldn't have even paid for them to come back then, since they don't have enough worthy restaurants to fill a book. Even in CA they do the whole state, as San Diego and LA wouldn't have enough for their own books.
A 1 star should be better than a non-starred place nearby, but it usually isn't going to be such a different experience from your favorite non-starred place. You might easily think your favorite place is better.
2 stars are usually a tasting menu, so it is a whole different experience. Every 2 star I've been to has been really good - like go for your anniversary dinner level.
3 stars are over the top tasting menus with the best ingredients, the best plating, the best wine pairings and the best service. These are places you save up to go to once in your life. They can be sciency, like Alinea, or more classic like Le Bernardin, but it is usually going to be 10-15 courses listed, with 2-5 more unlisted and take 3 hours or more.
I expect each major TX city to get 3-5 one stars, and maybe one place in TX gets 2 stars, but probably not. Any that get stars will be harder to get into after, like when the TX Monthly BBQ rankings come out.