For what matter France, I'm not sure it would change much, at least immediatly, while it doesn't make Edward III's position much better, and could actually slightly improve French situation on some regards, while possibly seeding more troubles on the short-term.
Jean II of France, as duke of Normandy, have the experience and skill in wars that lacked Philipp IV, and beneficy from the imperial support. I wouldn't see the succession itself being much problematic, especially giving the administrative and courtly re-organisation that happened IOTL against Jean and his supports wouldn't take place as such.
Not to say that Jean would prevent Calais from falling (while, IMO, there's more room for that) but I'd see more successful reliefs attempt (making a truce possible, while not that likely).A less troubled succession (due to less bureaucratic and courtly changes, and no disgrace for Jean) could lead to a more uneasy situation for Edward III in France.
The truce that took place IOTL in the late 1340's is still pretty much likely to happen, due to the Great Plague, so I wouldn't worry too much about that.
What may be more problematic would be an earlier contestation of Jean II by Charles II of Navarre. IOTL, Jean II managed to be sacred really quickly after preventing Edward III to do the same (I doubt Edward could manage to pull that ITTL, being less well settled on the mainland), but Charles II (in spite of being almost cartoonishly scheming) have enough forces and network to advance his positions earlier than IOTL.
Not that he would have been able to make a bid for the crown at this point, but an earlier involvement on this regard, means that the navarrese faction is going to be a thing early on, with Charles trying to beneficy from almost each possible discontents and troubles.
It would mean, for Jean, an harsher initial reign.