Keep noticing that when taking about Linux distro recommendations (on Reddit) users recommend Mint and Ubuntu for gaming.
Now don't get me wrong, they're great distros and with a bit of work are great for games, but I feel like theres better recommendations for new users looking into getting into gaming on linux.
There are better "gaming" distros, but unless someone uses their PC exclusively for gaming, when it comes time to install other kinds of software for school or work or whatever, they're going to get thrown in the deep ends of Linux.
But guess what does have two decades of software and tutorials to set up just about everything in existence? Ubuntu, and by extension Mint.
Sure you can squeeze more out of your games with something like Bazzite, but the general platform that anything Linux-native targets is usually Ubuntu. Sure there's distrobox and stuff that's like telling the average gamer to go set up WSL. It's not hard per-se but the amount of things to learn increases very quickly.
Thus, even though Ubuntu is very average these days, it's still a safe bet for new users.
I just want to point out that even bazzite comes with the productivity basics: full libreoffice, Thunderbird, gimp and other graphics software available on installation. VSC has an official (and inofficial) app available as well.
Not saying you're wrong of course, but as someone who uses his computer to game, consume music and media, and dabble in coding and game modding I haven't missed anything so far (am very new to Linux myself). Though I'm sure that a more discerning user may find those essentials insufficient.
Probably not the best example in retrospect, since its only gotcha is that it's Fedora Atomic.
Mainly my point is if you Google "how do I install X" you'll get plenty of Ubuntu results out of the box, which when you're an overwhelmed newbie is very helpful. Like, if you start with nothing, you just kissed goodbye to your Windows 11 install, you dive head first into Bazzite and you've got Firefox, Discord and Steam going, everything feels good. Then you start looking up "how to install X on Linux", first you get a bunch of Ubuntu results, then you swap Linux for "bazzite", nothing because it's fairly new, but it's Fedora so you look into Fedora but you realize Bazzite is actually Fedora Atomic and it's a whole other way of installing things, maybe you just try running a .run or .sh file, or you give up and try to just make install from source but t̶h̴e̸ ̵f̸i̸l̸e̷s̸y̶s̷t̸e̶m̴ ̴i̶s̸ ̷r̷e̴a̴d̴o̷n̶l̷y̷ a̴n̵d̸w̷̪͊h̵̟̏y̴̻͛ ̸͉̒i̶͖͆s̸̪̎ ̸̗̏Ḷ̴͌i̶̞͑n̶̫͂u̵̯͋x̴͓͋ ̵͈̀ŝ̴̗o̴̱̒ ̴̭̎d̸̨͊a̷͙̽m̵̘̈ṇ̸̐ c̷͓͝ò̵̙m̵̲͛p̷̖̓ĺ̴̰ĭ̵̥c̵̰̽ă̸̩t̷͗ͅe̵͈̍d̵̻̃.
I would argue Ubuntu kinda sucks, but it sucks in a familiar windows-y kind of way where pretty much everyone knows how to fix it or make it work usually by blindly executing stuff. Not great, but it works, and it doesn't require much thinking. Ubuntu is pretty much the only distro you can find your way without caring what a distro is just by the pile of tutorials for Ubuntu or assuming Ubuntu. Case in point: Linus from LTT when he tried to apt install steam on Manjaro, after nuking his entire DE on Pop_OS using the same command. It's entirely his fault, but that's still a common and frustrating experience and they add up.
Same reason sometimes I just tell people honestly, just stick with Windows. Linux would be a good fit, it would be way better, but they're not willing or accepting of the learning curve. Sometimes you're just better sticking with what most people use, so everyone knows how to fix your problems.
I'm fairly tech-savvy and have double-booted Arch in the past, but I'm still having headaches trying to understand how my new Atomic Fedora (Aurora) install works. I love the idea but a little documentation wouldn't hurt.