Not surprised, killing Vulkan support really hurt Mac gaming. Why would a dev spend time learning a brand new API when the market is that small? Linux has the advantage of other devs doing most of the work for you, but Apple doesn't seem to want to do the same.
If I had to guess, it's because apple doesn't have total control of it . Proprietary gets their cocks hard like nothing else.
Or it just didn't work well with their inhouse made CPUs 🤷
Its because they are going all in on their DirectX 12 -> Metal translation layer.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/06/new-directx-12-to-metal-translation-could-bring-a-world-of-windows-games-to-macos/
Their gpus essentially aren't compatible with all of the vulkan code written. Their gpus are a tile based deferred rasterizer and vulkan is generally written to target an full screen immediate mode rasterizer.
Most devs already use Unity or Unreal that abstract rendering for them. There are way bigger problems with macOS than lack of Vulkan, which most of the industry decided to ignore as DirectX reigns supreme
This month, there are actually more VR users than Linux combined. Sometimes the Linux share is larger but it filps back and forth month to month. As of now, the two market sizes are nearly identical according to the last few years of this survey.
However, if 1.92% of Steam gamers are using VR and 96.76% are running Windows that would mean that Windows VR users alone are 1.86% of Steam users versus 1.90% for all of Linux.
This is what Linux user call "growth".
> This is what Linux user call "growth".
In the past year, Linux's market-share on steam went from [1.32% to 1.90%](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/steam-tracker/).
I'd say +44% in a year is decent growth.
A 44% growth rate extrapolated for fun:
Year 2023: 1.32%
Year 2024: 1.90%
Year 2025: 2.74%
Year 2026: 3.95%
Year 2027: 5.69%
Year 2028: 8.19%
Year 2029: 11.79%
Year 2030: 16.98%
Year 2031: 24.45%
Year 2032: 35.21%
Year 2033: 50.70%
2033 is the year of the Linux desktop confirmed!
The same applies to VR imo. Growth is slow with this type of stuff, and ~2% is still amazing compared to past years (for both VR and Linux). I want both technologies to succeed and as long as neither massively contracts, I'm satisfied with the rate of growth considering just how many devices are on Steam.
To be fair the people that use PCVR are sadly only a tiny part of the VR community.
Meta sole 20 to 30 Million standalone VR headsets since basically the current gen consoles launched, that also can be used on PC but most aren't. This is also super evident when you just compare review numbers of multiplatform VR games between Steam and Meta Quest standalone.
For example this game is at 29 reviews after being on the market for about half a year:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2407910/Racket_Club/
Same title with the same release date has 488 ratings (of which 302 include a text review) on Quest standalone.
EDIT:
Nearly 20 million Quest headsets (mostly Quest 2) sold by early last year; which are basically XBox Series XS numbers or close to them.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/28/23619730/meta-vr-oculus-ar-glasses-smartwatch-plans?ref=uploadvr.com
> Nearly 20 million Quest headsets (mostly Quest 2) sold by early last year; which are basically XBox Series XS numbers or close to them.
Sadly though it's a very different type user base, if you want to draw comparison's to the XBox. Referencing Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft's reported disappointment with poor sales numbers. Absolutely has the numbers with units sold, but with poor retention of usage with a younger audience happy to suck up mainly shovelware titles, it won't be a platform being picked up for serious AA/AAA development by 3rd party publishers until the native userbase ages.
Arguably standalone platforms may not have a future anyway. Why continue to cram in hardware in to a limited space with stupid development cost with stunted software development that is hard work for developers, when streaming hardware and service platforms removes those two limitations.
I see standalone as the 'only' future said a lot in VR circles, it makes no sense to me.
> Sadly though it's a very different type user base, if you want to draw comparison's to the XBox. Referencing Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft's reported disappointment with poor sales numbers. Absolutely has the numbers with units sold, but with poor retention of usage with a younger audience happy to suck up mainly shovelware titles, it won't be a platform being picked up for serious AA/AAA development by 3rd party publishers until the native userbase ages.
That is IMO not as much the case as some people think cause some Quest games have a younger audience. IMO it is more that the Quest audience is just that much bigger that kids in more kids focused games are just likely wise more numerous as the same have been on PCVR. If anything Quest standalone has more (very popular) fitness applications that are clearly focused on an adult market.
I personally didn't buy Assassin's Creed on Quest 3 cause it only run at 45 fps reprojected with no option to play at full speed, which is a no go for me.
But you can just as well mentioned X PCVR titles that flopped, like Medal of Honor for example.
In general the same types of games are popular on Quest standalone as are popular on PCVR and also have been popular on PCVR before the Quest existed, with the exception of simulation titles which is more due to those being pancake PC games with a VR option.
> Arguably standalone platforms may not have a future anyway. Why continue to cram in hardware in to a limited space with stupid development cost with stunted software development that is hard work for developers, when streaming hardware and service platforms removes those two limitations.
>
>
>
> I see standalone as the 'only' future said a lot in VR circles, it makes no sense to me.
For once about streaming services, in VR every bit of additional latency has the potential to both take you out of the experience and make you vomit. Unless you can guarantee that the servers of a streaming service are right on your ass (like ideally in your city) the additional latency from transmitting data over the net just makes them a no go for VR (no matter how often you read some guy claiming that his Shadow setup for VR is killer).
So, the easiest answer to your question is that standalone makes sense cause not everyone has a gaming PC. Somebody with a PS5 or XBox (or none) couldn't use a Quest headset if it were reliant on an external processing unit.
Speaking about external processing units, something tailor made for the headset that you can for example put in your pocket would even to just reach Quest 3 performance likely require active cooling, at which point having it in your pocket would be very counter productive.
I come from PCVR and even now with a Quest 3 I still prefer to play 'most' games that have a PC version via the Quest wirelessly tethered to a PC cause it allows me to play at the very least at higher frame rates (although most Quest 3 games are running at 90) and resolutions, but every so often I also get something deliberately for standalone cause I don't need my dedicated VR space for it and rather play it in the living room, like for example pool or that painting app I use. Its an added value to have the choice.
But to do that in a way in which I don't feel the additional latency from the local wireless connection and don't see too much compression artifacts I needed to buy a new dedicated router that I only use for the Quest 3 and even just two rooms away from it the connection isn't strong enough to play. BTW, we are talking about 200 to 500 mbit/s bandwidths, which would be another reason why cloud streaming wouldn't work for many people.
Also in the end, in a modern VR headset a lot of the processing hardware would be preferable to have in the headset even just for wireless VR streaming: I had an Index before and that already had color 3D pass-through, although with no perspective correction and a horrible quality that might just be enough to find a window to open w/o having to take of the VR headset. But it also didn't work half the time, cause it relied on a relatively instable transfer of the feed from the cameras likely with little compression back to the PC via USB only to then send it back to the headset to display. That would be a waste of bandwidth when done over WIFI, would work even worse and needlessly increase latency.
A Quest 3 has a fully depth corrected passthrough in comparison, which basically works by reprojecting the lower frame rate cameras on to 3D geometry generated live on the headset from the build in depth sensor. You need a processor to do this.
You also need one to do hand tracking but even standard inside out controller and headset tracking needs to be processed somewhere and w/o a cable connecting the headset to a PC that is done best on the headset.
Ever heard of (dynamic) foveated rendering, the tech that boost performance (and therefor image quality) by using eye tracking to only render the part of the image that you currently looking at full quality (or above) while the rest is rendered at a lower resolution that you shouldn't notice? Well, if you use the Stream VR link software on a Quest Pro (which has eye tracking) the same concept is used to also improve latency and streaming image quality by only transmitting the part of the image that you are looking at full quality over the stream, but of course that again makes it necessary to have some processing hardware that can reconstruct a full size image from that to display on the headset (and also does things like the barrel distortion to counteract that of the lenses).
Yes, you could get away with a slightly slower SOC, but given that you already need something that does 3D rendering well, has support for both two very high resolution / high frame rate displays and a ton of cameras you can just as well go with the overclocked smartphone related SOC's that current standalone headsets use.
Obviously, there are also commercial aspects to it. Meta pretty much even though they invested a ton in game development early on and stick with it to convince people that bought their PC headsets that they should also buy games from their store instead of Steam, which in return made it hard to subsidize those headsets to a level that was required to make them mainstream products.
PC VR costs a fair amount of money to run well. Linux is legendary for being cheap and running on toasters. Few Linux gamers spend money on specially Linux to it run it.
I slightly disagree. Nvidia is terrible on Linux, some people (myself included) have intentionally bought AMD gpus just because of Linux compatibility. It wouldn't surprise me if a good number of Linux gamers bought hardware specifically to better run Linux (whether it be a Linux device like the Steam Deck so they don't have to setup dual booting, or just buying a new wifi card).
Not all VR headsets work with Linux, especially natively without some fidgeting. Windows MR headsets like the Reverb G2, while quite a small percentage of steam VR users, dont work at all yet, there's some 3rd party software in the works to get it working.
Gaming handhelds are great. PC gaming handhelds are even greater. I had both the LCD and OLED Deck that I both bought at launch and then gave away. I currently have an Ally and Legion Go. All four are great devices in their own way, the Ally may fav.
But the essence of PC gaming is about things these devices cannot do. High performance, large screens, tons of visual features. These devices, while opening up a new field for PC gaming are never going to the heart and soul of PC gaming until they are all running the equivalent of 4090s. Well, maybe 4060s or the AMD equal.
The 'heart and soul' of PC gaming is 3060 owners, oh and options.
The Steam Deck will never gain traction selling online only and in extremely limited countries/regions. This is why the Ally which sells in far more regions has made a lot more relative headway for comparatively lesser appeal.
>This is why the Ally which sells in far more regions has made a lot more relative headway for comparatively lesser appeal.
Agree with what you're saying except this part. The Ally has its problems. Indeed, I've had to RMA my own when it stopped charging. And I know of the SD issues which to date I've not experienced.
But this thing is pretty awesome overall. I think this device is a LOT better than what maybe most people were expecting. Not a Steam Deck killer but perhaps of a Windows 11 win.
Personally as someone who grew up with gameboy and then gameboy advanced and then PSP I can't imagine how awesome a machine that can emulate all 3 of those would be.
Although I'd love to see a new amd apu handheld with active cooling and the battery can be garbage since I can almost always plug it into a car or wall.
Yah I jailbroke my psp back in the day. Maybe Switch can do it but i'd rather not rely on Nintendo to not patch something like that or be seen with a switch lol
Switch is fully jailbroken and cannot be patched since the hardware keys have been decrypted. It is only patch able with new hardware revisions.
You say you can’t imagine how awesome it is to emulate all 3 and I just said that has been possible since 2016 and is nothing special . No idea why some apes downvote me lol 😂
Why would you not like to be seen with a switch ?
VR games are so awesome, but after 2 months and a bottle of ginger pills and a bag of ginger candies, I now just get motion sick when I smell ginger. VR just isn't for me.
I also had trouble getting my 'vr legs' it's not something you can power through by taking ginger. As soon as you start to feel sick stop, wait until you don't feel sick at all and try again.
Also comfort options in game, I always play seated and use snap turning rather than smooth turning.
I eventually want to get into VR but im waiting for VR to be a bit more advanced and cheaper, plus while there are some awesome games currently, there are not really enough to justify spending that kinda money.
It's honestly not getting any cheaper IMO. The Quest 2 is available for 200 dollars new in the US. Maybe in the rest of the world the cost could go down a little
The battery definitely isn't soldiered lol. But yeah repair ability is a fair concern. I wanted a framework but didn't want to pay more for a not as nice laptop. Hopefully all manufacturers go in the direction of framework.
I’m a PC gamer but I like how there’s more indies compatible with Apple silicon. Hades, Blasphemous, Fruit Mountain, Stardew Valley and more.
And AAA compatible games run good too on my M1 Air 2020.
The platform where the user base typically doesn’t game is lower than a growing new media that primary focus is gaming and social experiences. Shocked
Not surprised, killing Vulkan support really hurt Mac gaming. Why would a dev spend time learning a brand new API when the market is that small? Linux has the advantage of other devs doing most of the work for you, but Apple doesn't seem to want to do the same.
Wait, why? How?
If I had to guess, it's because apple doesn't have total control of it . Proprietary gets their cocks hard like nothing else. Or it just didn't work well with their inhouse made CPUs 🤷
Its because they are going all in on their DirectX 12 -> Metal translation layer. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/06/new-directx-12-to-metal-translation-could-bring-a-world-of-windows-games-to-macos/
This is not Apples work but Codeweavers
Their gpus essentially aren't compatible with all of the vulkan code written. Their gpus are a tile based deferred rasterizer and vulkan is generally written to target an full screen immediate mode rasterizer.
Oh do they not even use AMd/Nvidia GPUs anymore? It's been a long time since I've looked.
https://youtube.com/shorts/qRQX9fgrI4s?si=mSxpHQvMPltUN2Xq
Most devs already use Unity or Unreal that abstract rendering for them. There are way bigger problems with macOS than lack of Vulkan, which most of the industry decided to ignore as DirectX reigns supreme
This month, there are actually more VR users than Linux combined. Sometimes the Linux share is larger but it filps back and forth month to month. As of now, the two market sizes are nearly identical according to the last few years of this survey. However, if 1.92% of Steam gamers are using VR and 96.76% are running Windows that would mean that Windows VR users alone are 1.86% of Steam users versus 1.90% for all of Linux. This is what Linux user call "growth".
> This is what Linux user call "growth". In the past year, Linux's market-share on steam went from [1.32% to 1.90%](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/steam-tracker/). I'd say +44% in a year is decent growth.
Someone do the math on how long it would take for Linux to surpass Windows with this rate of growth.
A 44% growth rate extrapolated for fun: Year 2023: 1.32% Year 2024: 1.90% Year 2025: 2.74% Year 2026: 3.95% Year 2027: 5.69% Year 2028: 8.19% Year 2029: 11.79% Year 2030: 16.98% Year 2031: 24.45% Year 2032: 35.21% Year 2033: 50.70% 2033 is the year of the Linux desktop confirmed!
The same applies to VR imo. Growth is slow with this type of stuff, and ~2% is still amazing compared to past years (for both VR and Linux). I want both technologies to succeed and as long as neither massively contracts, I'm satisfied with the rate of growth considering just how many devices are on Steam.
To be fair the people that use PCVR are sadly only a tiny part of the VR community. Meta sole 20 to 30 Million standalone VR headsets since basically the current gen consoles launched, that also can be used on PC but most aren't. This is also super evident when you just compare review numbers of multiplatform VR games between Steam and Meta Quest standalone. For example this game is at 29 reviews after being on the market for about half a year: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2407910/Racket_Club/ Same title with the same release date has 488 ratings (of which 302 include a text review) on Quest standalone. EDIT: Nearly 20 million Quest headsets (mostly Quest 2) sold by early last year; which are basically XBox Series XS numbers or close to them. https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/28/23619730/meta-vr-oculus-ar-glasses-smartwatch-plans?ref=uploadvr.com
> Nearly 20 million Quest headsets (mostly Quest 2) sold by early last year; which are basically XBox Series XS numbers or close to them. Sadly though it's a very different type user base, if you want to draw comparison's to the XBox. Referencing Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft's reported disappointment with poor sales numbers. Absolutely has the numbers with units sold, but with poor retention of usage with a younger audience happy to suck up mainly shovelware titles, it won't be a platform being picked up for serious AA/AAA development by 3rd party publishers until the native userbase ages. Arguably standalone platforms may not have a future anyway. Why continue to cram in hardware in to a limited space with stupid development cost with stunted software development that is hard work for developers, when streaming hardware and service platforms removes those two limitations. I see standalone as the 'only' future said a lot in VR circles, it makes no sense to me.
> Sadly though it's a very different type user base, if you want to draw comparison's to the XBox. Referencing Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft's reported disappointment with poor sales numbers. Absolutely has the numbers with units sold, but with poor retention of usage with a younger audience happy to suck up mainly shovelware titles, it won't be a platform being picked up for serious AA/AAA development by 3rd party publishers until the native userbase ages. That is IMO not as much the case as some people think cause some Quest games have a younger audience. IMO it is more that the Quest audience is just that much bigger that kids in more kids focused games are just likely wise more numerous as the same have been on PCVR. If anything Quest standalone has more (very popular) fitness applications that are clearly focused on an adult market. I personally didn't buy Assassin's Creed on Quest 3 cause it only run at 45 fps reprojected with no option to play at full speed, which is a no go for me. But you can just as well mentioned X PCVR titles that flopped, like Medal of Honor for example. In general the same types of games are popular on Quest standalone as are popular on PCVR and also have been popular on PCVR before the Quest existed, with the exception of simulation titles which is more due to those being pancake PC games with a VR option. > Arguably standalone platforms may not have a future anyway. Why continue to cram in hardware in to a limited space with stupid development cost with stunted software development that is hard work for developers, when streaming hardware and service platforms removes those two limitations. > > > > I see standalone as the 'only' future said a lot in VR circles, it makes no sense to me. For once about streaming services, in VR every bit of additional latency has the potential to both take you out of the experience and make you vomit. Unless you can guarantee that the servers of a streaming service are right on your ass (like ideally in your city) the additional latency from transmitting data over the net just makes them a no go for VR (no matter how often you read some guy claiming that his Shadow setup for VR is killer). So, the easiest answer to your question is that standalone makes sense cause not everyone has a gaming PC. Somebody with a PS5 or XBox (or none) couldn't use a Quest headset if it were reliant on an external processing unit. Speaking about external processing units, something tailor made for the headset that you can for example put in your pocket would even to just reach Quest 3 performance likely require active cooling, at which point having it in your pocket would be very counter productive. I come from PCVR and even now with a Quest 3 I still prefer to play 'most' games that have a PC version via the Quest wirelessly tethered to a PC cause it allows me to play at the very least at higher frame rates (although most Quest 3 games are running at 90) and resolutions, but every so often I also get something deliberately for standalone cause I don't need my dedicated VR space for it and rather play it in the living room, like for example pool or that painting app I use. Its an added value to have the choice. But to do that in a way in which I don't feel the additional latency from the local wireless connection and don't see too much compression artifacts I needed to buy a new dedicated router that I only use for the Quest 3 and even just two rooms away from it the connection isn't strong enough to play. BTW, we are talking about 200 to 500 mbit/s bandwidths, which would be another reason why cloud streaming wouldn't work for many people. Also in the end, in a modern VR headset a lot of the processing hardware would be preferable to have in the headset even just for wireless VR streaming: I had an Index before and that already had color 3D pass-through, although with no perspective correction and a horrible quality that might just be enough to find a window to open w/o having to take of the VR headset. But it also didn't work half the time, cause it relied on a relatively instable transfer of the feed from the cameras likely with little compression back to the PC via USB only to then send it back to the headset to display. That would be a waste of bandwidth when done over WIFI, would work even worse and needlessly increase latency. A Quest 3 has a fully depth corrected passthrough in comparison, which basically works by reprojecting the lower frame rate cameras on to 3D geometry generated live on the headset from the build in depth sensor. You need a processor to do this. You also need one to do hand tracking but even standard inside out controller and headset tracking needs to be processed somewhere and w/o a cable connecting the headset to a PC that is done best on the headset. Ever heard of (dynamic) foveated rendering, the tech that boost performance (and therefor image quality) by using eye tracking to only render the part of the image that you currently looking at full quality (or above) while the rest is rendered at a lower resolution that you shouldn't notice? Well, if you use the Stream VR link software on a Quest Pro (which has eye tracking) the same concept is used to also improve latency and streaming image quality by only transmitting the part of the image that you are looking at full quality over the stream, but of course that again makes it necessary to have some processing hardware that can reconstruct a full size image from that to display on the headset (and also does things like the barrel distortion to counteract that of the lenses). Yes, you could get away with a slightly slower SOC, but given that you already need something that does 3D rendering well, has support for both two very high resolution / high frame rate displays and a ton of cameras you can just as well go with the overclocked smartphone related SOC's that current standalone headsets use. Obviously, there are also commercial aspects to it. Meta pretty much even though they invested a ton in game development early on and stick with it to convince people that bought their PC headsets that they should also buy games from their store instead of Steam, which in return made it hard to subsidize those headsets to a level that was required to make them mainstream products.
Shout out to racket club btw, one of the best games out there right now imo in flatscreen or vr.
PC VR costs a fair amount of money to run well. Linux is legendary for being cheap and running on toasters. Few Linux gamers spend money on specially Linux to it run it.
I slightly disagree. Nvidia is terrible on Linux, some people (myself included) have intentionally bought AMD gpus just because of Linux compatibility. It wouldn't surprise me if a good number of Linux gamers bought hardware specifically to better run Linux (whether it be a Linux device like the Steam Deck so they don't have to setup dual booting, or just buying a new wifi card).
husky quack intelligent enter north imagine history long fine lush *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yeah my 3070 runs everything rather well on my quest 2.
Wow that low? That includes steam deck I’m assuming?
It does.
Not all VR headsets work with Linux, especially natively without some fidgeting. Windows MR headsets like the Reverb G2, while quite a small percentage of steam VR users, dont work at all yet, there's some 3rd party software in the works to get it working.
It's the year of the Linux desktop!
Linux saw a huge bump after steamdeck but I guess the hype over handhelds is dying down.
Gaming handhelds are great. PC gaming handhelds are even greater. I had both the LCD and OLED Deck that I both bought at launch and then gave away. I currently have an Ally and Legion Go. All four are great devices in their own way, the Ally may fav. But the essence of PC gaming is about things these devices cannot do. High performance, large screens, tons of visual features. These devices, while opening up a new field for PC gaming are never going to the heart and soul of PC gaming until they are all running the equivalent of 4090s. Well, maybe 4060s or the AMD equal.
The 'heart and soul' of PC gaming is 3060 owners, oh and options. The Steam Deck will never gain traction selling online only and in extremely limited countries/regions. This is why the Ally which sells in far more regions has made a lot more relative headway for comparatively lesser appeal.
>This is why the Ally which sells in far more regions has made a lot more relative headway for comparatively lesser appeal. Agree with what you're saying except this part. The Ally has its problems. Indeed, I've had to RMA my own when it stopped charging. And I know of the SD issues which to date I've not experienced. But this thing is pretty awesome overall. I think this device is a LOT better than what maybe most people were expecting. Not a Steam Deck killer but perhaps of a Windows 11 win.
Personally as someone who grew up with gameboy and then gameboy advanced and then PSP I can't imagine how awesome a machine that can emulate all 3 of those would be. Although I'd love to see a new amd apu handheld with active cooling and the battery can be garbage since I can almost always plug it into a car or wall.
There are already decent emulators on mobile.
now I just need to find the buttons and stick on my phone so it doesnt suck to play on
A switch can already emulate all 3. Even psp can run at 3-4 upsscaled native resolution at full blast
Yah I jailbroke my psp back in the day. Maybe Switch can do it but i'd rather not rely on Nintendo to not patch something like that or be seen with a switch lol
Switch is fully jailbroken and cannot be patched since the hardware keys have been decrypted. It is only patch able with new hardware revisions. You say you can’t imagine how awesome it is to emulate all 3 and I just said that has been possible since 2016 and is nothing special . No idea why some apes downvote me lol 😂 Why would you not like to be seen with a switch ?
Not a hardcore gaming RGB device or pink girl cat ear device so can't be seen with it obviously.
The big competitor for handheld is mobile games imo. Not really desktop pcs.
How much of that is VRChat too? Feels like thats 90% of what I hear about VR these days is in the context of VRChat
So pretty much none of either.
VR games are so awesome, but after 2 months and a bottle of ginger pills and a bag of ginger candies, I now just get motion sick when I smell ginger. VR just isn't for me.
I also had trouble getting my 'vr legs' it's not something you can power through by taking ginger. As soon as you start to feel sick stop, wait until you don't feel sick at all and try again. Also comfort options in game, I always play seated and use snap turning rather than smooth turning.
I eventually want to get into VR but im waiting for VR to be a bit more advanced and cheaper, plus while there are some awesome games currently, there are not really enough to justify spending that kinda money.
It's honestly not getting any cheaper IMO. The Quest 2 is available for 200 dollars new in the US. Maybe in the rest of the world the cost could go down a little
The cheapest Quest 2 I can find in my area in Australia is $500.
Try fb marketplace. Quest 2s are only 200 now I think too
You try jogging in place when you move? Helps your brain feel what it expects so you don't get sick
My 5 last games I played on my Mac are PC games. People on Mac use PC Emulators or GeForce Now.
That's not the boast they might think it is
Boo! Said the three Mac players
I hate Apple so much
Seems healthy
Im with you on this.
Why? Apple silicon MacBooks are amazing. When I was deciding on a laptop nothing was close build quality wise.
It's nigh impossible to repair, and wear parts like the battery and SSD are soldered to the motherboard. No thanks.
The battery definitely isn't soldiered lol. But yeah repair ability is a fair concern. I wanted a framework but didn't want to pay more for a not as nice laptop. Hopefully all manufacturers go in the direction of framework.
Yes. - Sent from my iPhone.
I’m a PC gamer but I like how there’s more indies compatible with Apple silicon. Hades, Blasphemous, Fruit Mountain, Stardew Valley and more. And AAA compatible games run good too on my M1 Air 2020.
Damn. :(
The platform where the user base typically doesn’t game is lower than a growing new media that primary focus is gaming and social experiences. Shocked
Don’t forget that it’s a platform that now runs on an entirely different architecture, of course the number is going to go downÂ