You've missed the point. What are those rendering farms doing with all that extra time? They're not generating more frames per second at higher resolutions -- they're using it to ray trace and better simulate physics. This is the path forward to more realistic graphics.That's not a fair comparison between PRE-RENDERED scenes and on the fly rendering.
There's a reason they call it the bleeding edge. Early adopters have long paid the way for those who follow.So until that day comes, the RTX cards that have released so far and later are like a Kickstarter or Early Access, and folks are paying the associated fees through buying these cards?
A Wealth of Nations quote! Bless you, my son. However, if the production costs affect the entire industry, and ignoring product-substitution and other effects, the costs are invariably passed on. In fact, depending on the marginal-cost curve, the consumer might bear more than 100% of the increase. The converse situation is more easily understandable: a small reduction in production costs increases demand, allowing economies of scale, and resulting in a much larger reduction. We see this often in consumer electronics: at some point declining costs open the product to a far larger market, and production costs plummet precipitously."It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages." - Adam Smith
And the consumer only indirectly "bears the cost" of game development and only if the corporation can convince them that the value of the game is worth more to the consumer
But let's not get tangled in the weeds. It's indisputable that large-scale decreases in production costs will benefit both consumers and producers -- game studios AND gamers will both reap the rewards of path tracing.