Do you think it would be interesting to play to others (have heard they are technical pieces and not enjoyable for others)
I think it would be a lovely piece to play for others. In terms of where you are, I think you're playing it clearly enough for it to be quite enjoyable and I can understand what is going on in the music, but it's definitely not concert-ready.
Your second version is a bit steadier, but the voicing is a bit flatter and less nuanced (always a danger when spending too much time with a metronome). In both cases, you definitely are able to articulate when certain motifs come in and I can hear the interplay between the two voices, but it could use a lot more work on the details and the sculpting — there are times when the voicing is clear and there are times when it just sounds like you are playing notes. Each run of notes should have its own shape and you should be a bit more conscious about that — there are definitely times when you do this, but it feels like you haven't worked through the piece enough with this in mind.
I would keep recording it and playing it back to yourself, and whenever it feels a bit flat try to think about how you can sculpt it to give it a bit more character — experiment with being slightly more legato or non-legato, using crescendoes and decrescendoes, sometimes starting slightly late or early (without changing the tempo — this is where the metronome is handy). Remember that on harpsichord that dynamic changes aren't really an option, so expression is done mostly through texture and timing — on a piano you have more tools, but then it becomes easy to lean just on dynamics and forget you have a whole toolbox to work with. In the end, each motif or fragment should stand out, both against the counterpoint and against what came before and comes after.
One of the downsides of playing slower is that it makes the voicing much harder — timing subtleties are lost and fragments are stretched to the point that continuity is really hard to hear, especially when playing nonlegato. Listen to how beautifully Gould introduces the right-hand fragment at 0:09: it's so clear, and then it sort of recedes into the background — that sort of thing is easier to get to "pop" out at a faster tempo. At your second tempo, making it pop like that is nigh impossible, and at your faster tempo it's still quite difficult.
So I would also recommend experimenting with different speeds (with and without the metronome) to see how your ideas of it change as the piece expands and contracts, and finding your optimal tempo — the one where it's slow enough that you're not struggling, but it's fast enough that the voicing isn't too much of a challenge. You can increase this with effort and time, but at any stage of working on the piece there's likely to be a natural balance point in that tradeoff (it will vary in sections of the piece, but you should pick just one :-). Overall, it will probably sound nicer and more engaging if you can get it to a faster tempo, but it's far more important to get the voicing/articulation to a better place regardless of the tempo you choose, so pick the tempo where the voicing sounds most beautiful to you when you record it and play it back to yourself.
Recording yourself is especially important with counterpoint/Bach, I find, because if you think
about the voicing then the fragments will pop out to you as you play, but it may not pop out to the listener, and it's very easy to deceive yourself into thinking you're making it clearer than you actually are — listening to your recording is a way of forcing some honesty about how much is actually coming across.
Listening to other recordings is a great way to steal some ideas of how you can sculpt the musical fragments and create more interplay between the counterpoint (I'd especially recommend finding a few recordings of it on harpsichord and clavichord to see my points about texture/timing), but I would recommend against trying to play like any particular recording — for a piece like this, it's especially important that you're able to create your own mental model of what it is that you're playing rather than trying to imitate a sound.
When you listen to professional recordings, listen for two things: what is your ear drawn to, and what is it about the way they play that draws your ear to those bits. And equally, what is your ear sort of drawn away from, where one hand recedes into the background, and how do they do that (playing lighter, less legato, more legato, playing it slightly faster and letting it end early, etc.). The second part (making the counterpoint recede into the background) is the most important part of counterpoint — anyone can make a new entrance "pop", but shifting the balance around in the counterpoint is where all the magic happens.
If you can get it concert-ready, this is absolutely a piece that people will love to listen to (if they enjoy Bach, that is — it always surprises me, but there are definitely people for whom Bach is not their cup of tea). It has some really lovely motifs with a nice yearning quality to it. It's not a piece most people would seek out, but it would not be out of place on a recital of Baroque or Bach keyboard works, say.