At the moment the problem of superseding ordinary computers still looks like one of technical/engineering nature.
If achieving this is not possible even in principle it could lead to some new developments.
There are some people considering/working on superdeterminism as a possible interpretation of quantum mechanics (the idea that everything, every outcome of an measurement is predetermined by the universe in such a way for us not to gain the complete information about the quantum system. I would not like to discourage anyone, but in fact this would be a conspiracy theory on a cosmic scale. In some discussion on physics stackexchange it was pointed out by Peter Shor that if it were true we wouldn't be able to achieve quantum supremacy.
It is true that Gerard 't Hooft, the most famous
proponent of superdeterminism is an asymptotic quantum supremacy skeptic, but I don't think superdeterminism implies no quantum supremacy. I'm a fan of superdeterminism, but I consider it to be in a pre-interpretation level of maturity, where the idea isn't even completely fleshed out. I hope that some day it can be turned into a proper interpretation like Many-Worlds and QBism, and at that point it will give all the standard predictions of QM, including the possibility of quantum supremacy.
There are some people considering/working on superdeterminism as a possible interpretation of quantum mechanics (the idea that everything, every outcome of an measurement is predetermined by the universe in such a way for us not to gain the complete information about the quantum system. I would not like to discourage anyone, but in fact this would be a conspiracy theory on a cosmic scale. In some discussion on physics stackexchange it was pointed out by Peter Shor that if it were true we wouldn't be able to achieve quantum supremacy.