Personally I think the complaints are valid, It's been a long wait for Pascals replacement & when it got here we are shown a tech that's going to have a slow uptake & the only card with a real world performance increase costs double the card it replaces. That's the main problem & it's a valid one.
it depends how you look at it. The 20 series can do stuff the previous gen;s cannot. While it may not be "real world" performance at the moment, the future is probably where they're going to shine. I personally don't see the point in just pushing out more of the same each gen. At some point someone has to take the step of introducing new tech. And that is always naturally going to mean a slow take-up initially.
Top end 10 series were already fast enough for the majority so it's a good time to introduce new tech. Nothing outside of poorly developed games struggle at 1080P or 1440P with a 1080 Ti or even lesser 10 series. Probably 75%+ of 20 series buyers, including me, didn't really need to upgrade, and the same % is probably true about those complaining about the 20 series.
Should the new features help make the GPU's shine then that will negative some of the argument against pricing, especially the Ti which has poor availability anyway.
It'll be good to see how the first RT and DLSS games do as that will help clarify whether NV have released new tech a little too early, especially in the case of RT.
What does back the pricing of the 20 series is that if new games do indeed perform well, there;s probably going to be a mad upgrade rush. People will want to experience RT for themselves if it's a half decent implementation. You're paying say £40 or whatever for a game where a lot of R&D has been spent on RT, why not?