Embraced or been forced into it? If you want to do long term planning and design, good luck. Everyone wants to continuously change their mind on what they want/need and have the software react yet they also somehow assume this approach creates well defined systems when it does quite the opposite. Adaptation can still create reliable and well defined systems but the rate of adaptation needs to be reasonable. In agile that simply isn't the case, it's just a way to pass consumer demand and responsibility for meeting that demand right down to developers while arbitrarily placing budgetary and time constraints around that process. Development teams are often acting as small businesses anymore with similar risks but less rewards with a middle men sitting between them and the consumer, unless you work at a large tech company where that's still a little bit insulated although not entirely when product lines are killed off.
Ultimately, you just create and endless amount of complex work that keeps developers continuously busy. On the bright side there's a never ending amount of tedious work wrestling systems back into some manageable form, on the downside that work is miserable, in my opinion because much of it can be removed whth proper planning. At some point, expectations eventually meet reality no matter how many developers management burns through, at some point it's clearly not an issue with technology, it's an issue with approach and project management. By that time the organization has had enough turnover in those above and below those pushing agile that those issues too can be hand waived away and the cycle repeats.