They are making cards which are better than the last cards yes. The point is the "MSRP" is dishonest if it is only used for a small batch of cards to claim value points in reviews.
It's like a wonky version of planned sales where items are clearly available on a shelf long enough at "overprice" so that a company can claim "75% off" next week.
In this case it would be reference cards being loss leaders sold at "underprice" so reviews can write it down then next week manufacturers are allowed to sell cards at "realistic price".
Actually there is a term for that which could fit.
Lets yoink a snippet from an encyclopedia page... on bait and switch
But this isn't the United States and that scenario is illegal here yet it matches so that's curious.
So Turing was overpriced for its entire life cycle to make ~$750--$800 cards look good?
My guess is that Nvidia was either unable to innovate in a manner that allowed Turing to be reasonably priced and profitable or, they just scalped their own cards and thought people would buy it if they said "ray tracing" enough. With no competition at the high end, we consumers could only take it or leave it.
Now there's competition and this generation is faster, dollar for dollar.
Even leaving out Turing, the price performance trajectory is back in line this generation. And while "back in line" is a far cry from a bargain, it's not some huge rip off.