In a world with perfect optimizing compilers that never introduce bugs, we should never "need" print debugging. But that's not where I live, so I'll keep using print debugging.
On the other hand... adding print statements can also invalidate certain optimizations (an excellent source of heisenbugs), so I'll never stop using debuggers either
Print debugging is essential in distributed systems. Sitting in the debugger waiting for human input often leads to timeouts and not covering the case you want. Of course, sometimes adding the prints, or even just collecting values to be printed later also changes execution flow, but like do the best you can.
All the more reason for folks to spend more time using the debugger; for instance, break points are only one feature.
Setting up remote debugging I’ll agree is more difficult than a local application, but each remote machine can automatically run startup commands and not require user input; commands can be run at particular places too (to print output etc) with conditional trace points, all while not impacting the code itself.
Main point is that folks don’t spend enough time learning the debugger, as print statements are easier. But using the debugger is a better practice in my opinion in the case where print statements are added just for a quick test, then removed.
On the other hand... adding print statements can also invalidate certain optimizations (an excellent source of heisenbugs), so I'll never stop using debuggers either