Maybe not if you want to go pro, but amateur/casual FPS play is totally fine. Have you tried it recently?

Between GeForce Now's 120 Hz support, adaptive v-sync, and Nvidia Reflex, it's very playable IMHO. No, it's not as nice as having a 4080 below your desk, but compared to midrange or lower GPUs, the minor input/network latency is more than worth it in exchange for a smooth high FPS, higher viewing distance, and great DLSS.

I don't play competitively (as in ranked), but I do play a lot of shooters on it. It's so much better than it was on Stadia, for example.

I don't play competitively either, but it's pretty easy for me to detect a frame of lag in my mouse controls. (I had to return a non-gaming ergonomic mouse for this reason.) Maybe most people won't care, but it has a material impact on gameplay and immersion.

Anyway, my problem is with the assertion that streaming is "the future" of gaming. It might become a major segment of the market, but I don't expect that it will dominate.

Well, that's why it's an opinion that few agree with :)

IMO most people don't care about playing competitively anyway (as in ranked e-sports). PVP shooters are common even on shitty devices (like PUBG or Fortnite on phones)... and of course consoles. Having a leet PC gaming setup with a super high DPI mouse just isn't a concern of many -- or maybe most -- gamers. Good enough is good enough.

Granted, people have been saying "cloud gaming is the future!" for ~~the better part of~~ (edit: more than!) a decade now, since OnLive was first launched. Stadia was a very public failure, but now there are many (GFN, PSNow, XCloud, Luna, Boosteroid, Shadow, etc.) Among them, GeForce Now is the only one that has the synergy of also being the dominant GPU producer. I believe it won't be long before more players game on the cloud than on PCs.

But feel free to come back in 5-10 years and tell me how wrong I was, lol.