You are a fan XeSS, I see that, but the truth is, the performance isn't there. You have to turn the quality of XeSS down just to barely surpass native rendering speeds, negating any advantage in quality. It may be an option if you bought an Intel GPU, assuming it actually performs well on them, but for the majority of gamers that won't be the case. As for ghosting:
and it should be noted that FSR 2 was in quality mode and was still outperforming XeSS in balanced mode. Hardware Unboxing has a fantastic in depth comparison of all three. Their conclusion was that XeSS the vast majority of the time had the lowest quality, and the very worst performance of all three options, and that it was not worth the dev time for game developers to implement. Rarely, at quality or ultra quality XeSS surpasses FSR at fine detail, but you have to turn it all the way down to balanced or performance mode to get performance anywhere close to that of FSR in quality mode, making that advantage meaningless, especially when the ultra quality mode often results in worse than native resolution performance.
I'm not saying XeSS doesn't have a use case, probably for Arc users only, but I imagine it exists. The problem is why would you spend your companies money implementing it if the results are garbage on 99% of the gaming market's hardware? XeSS in balanced mode is a great improvement on FSR 1, a non-temporal, spatial uplift technology that is several years old, so I guess, if your choice was between those two you'd pick XeSS, but why would a game studio ever choose to make those your choices?