In general it has a bright future. It is not nearly as revolutionary as, for example, the Mill CPU by Out Of the Box Computing, but it does have some refinemen

In general it has a bright future. It is not nearly as revolutionary as, for example, the Mill CPU by Out Of the Box Computing, but it does have some refinements from all the lessons learned over the decades of ISA design. As more designs get produced, there will be more and more pressure on the chip designers to stick to the published specifications, instead of going their own way. Why? Because everyone will want to just use the existing toolchains (GCC, LLVM, etc.) and not have to support proprietary extensions. It helps that the specs themselves are easily available. The implementations that exist now are not at the leading edge of performance, but they are more than good enough for many applications. This will improve over time. One of the best features of the ISA is the design for extensions... meaning that extensions were planned from the very beginning. Unlike other architectures, where often the ISA is designed to be "complete", and adding extensions inevitably becomes difficult, expensive (cost or run-time performance, or both), or complex (which slows adoption).