Risc came out a decade after cisc, 1980 compared to 1970, it's now 43 years or almost 4 and a half decades later....it didn't happen yet and it will never happen.
You're entitled to your opinion about the future, as none of us can truly know what will happen. However, not your own version of history.
It's incorrect to say RISC "didn't happen". Actually, RISC CPUs powered the Internet revolution. Until the early 2000's, most internet servers were powered by SPARC, MIPS, PA-RISC, Alpha, or POWER - all RISC CPUs.
What propelled x86 past the RISC posse was its volume, more than anything else, which funded more R&D and enabled lower pricing. Intel's Itanium deal with HP put the first nail in the coffin of PA-RISC, which was one of the stronger players in the field. SGI made a string of famously bad business decisions and never really chased the internet server market, which took MIPS out of the running. Compaq bought DEC and sold off the CPU division to Intel, who subsequently killed off Alpha, consistently one of the fastest CPUs (if not
the fastest) in its day.
That left Sun holding the bag, but Sun wasn't structured to compete with commodity computers, like x86, and was undercut on price. They even entered the x86 server market, but too late. Most people who wanted an x86 UNIX server were already buying them from x86 PC makers and running Linux on them. Then Oracle came in and bought Sun for its Java technology. Oracle milked the SPARC server market, but starved the CPUs of R&D funding, until they were finally killed a few years ago.
The one thing it had nothing to do with was CISC vs. RISC. Internally, Intel CPUs, since the Pentium Pro have been a lot more RISC-like than CISC. And if CISC were so great, you ought to be able to point to other examples which remained competitive during the late 90's and beyond. But, you can't.