Top level goals make sense for focusing, but for generally just improving products significantly, getting rid of blockers is what's important.
They do not generate worth through ideas and they do not generate worth through implementations.
They solicit other people's ideas, count how many votes each idea gets, and passes them to the grunts.
They are middle management distilled.
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." - Heinlein
Devs, especially good ones, can make good products without a PM. A PM can be a nice tool to interface with the rest of the company, Sure.
I had a PM once who listened to Dev feedback and was great at communicating with customers/users.
When done correctly priotizing features which are technically boring or seemingly unnecessary is absolutely the right way forward.
That person is also in the right position to communicate Dev effort and difficulties back.
To be clear: I'm a software developer, and I feel this natural tendency too. I've gotten pretty good at suppressing it though.
Yeah, with abysmal user interfaces.
IME PMs are no better at that stuff than engineers.