Fuel Cells have a lot in common to ICE. They require a significant balance of plant that helps provide air to the fuel cell, coolant for many of the components, electronics controller and significant electrical harnessing, bracketry for support, filters, coolant pump, air source, radiator... etc.

in one way it is a downside since its more parts and complication than maybe a pure EV architecture, but the similarities to ICE arch means that its an attractive option to transition to for both the OEMs and a tiered supply base used to working on ICE vehicles. If you can get economies of scale going and bring cost down for fuel cell its a great replacement for many (not all) ICE archs.

They are preferred solutions for larger vehicles because of the weight of lithium ion batteries. also because theyre optimized for power density while electric architectures excel with energy capacity/storage. But if you can implement infrastructure at the locations where these larger Class A vehicles are (or busses), then you dont care about capacity for the known universe's lightest (resting mass) fuel as much since H2 refuel times are fast.

You are correct about boats though, it is also a good solution set there. Planes will only work if we can achieve air cooled hydrogen fuel cells and eliminate the expensive and heavy balance of plant (Hysata).

I drove hydrogen Mirai, and it feels pretty much electric in every way but fueling. It drives off battery, no hybrid transmission, hydrogen is only there to charge the battery.