Yes and no. I'd argue that just because there are good counters to a particular weapon system doesn't necessarily mean the system is obsolete: jets aren't made obsolete by SAMs for example. It will change the dynamic, though. The US seems to bank on achieving air superiority, so the vast majority of helicopters or jets would be intercepted. The other option, favored by Soviet doctrine, is to have lots of short range air defense vehicles deployed alongside the tanks. As for infantry teams or ATGM-equipped vehicles, there are options. You've got active protection systems, which could develop all the way to some sort of mini-CIWS. But there's also a question of targeting. Sure, those ATGMs can engage tanks at 8+km, but you need to find and target the tank first. I think you'll start to see a cat-and-mouse game: vehicle stealth, better optics and sensors, active radar, ISR teams and drones, anti-UAV weapons, etc. I think tanks will still play a major role, but that role may shift and they will likely need to work in tandem with other vehicles.

Actually, on that note I think in the next decade we'll see work on developing unmanned tanks, which I personally think will be a major game changer. A large portion of the internal volume of a tank is for the crew. Remove the crew and you can significantly reduce the volume of the tank, reducing the surface area, so you can provide the same amount of protection with much less armor by weight. You can get an unmanned vehicle with the same armor and firepower of a main battle tank with half the weight and significantly reduced size. There would be some trade offs (an unmanned system will necessarily have worse situational awareness, so the tank would probably need to operate alongside infantry teams or a manned vehicle) but I think that will help keep tanks on the battlefield for decades to come