Everything seen so far does not suggest it will improve.
SMRs might, possibly, change that — we shall have to see. I have nothing against SMRs, but they're novel, and I've seen a lot of novel ideas that seem interesting, go nowhere.
Almost all nuclear plants in the west were built in the 70s and 80s. The number built since is miniscule so of course the costs are going to be huge, they're one off projects.
Nuclear energy has had a massive research advantage over its entire lifetime. It simply never delivers due to being horrifically expensive.
You just keep making empty promises that never work out in reality. Just look at Flamanville 3 being 7x over budget and 13 years late on a 5 year construction schedule.
Solar with battery backup is about that, globally, on average.
But: the averages have sufficiently broad variance that there's places where one wins, and places where the other wins.
PV+battery is between 75-140 USD/MWh; whereas new nuclear is, depending on who I ask, any of 81-82, 65, or 141–221 USD/MWh.