Trying to classify gamers as "manchildren" and "entitled" because Apple has not been very successful on the enthusiast market feels extremely cheap.
It's cheap because it fails to acknowledge that while videogames started as simple toys, gaming has evolved as a $150 to $170 billion industry (as of 2020):
https://newzoo.com/insights/article...t-is-on-track-to-surpass-200-billion-in-2023/. We now have 40 year-old adults that grew up with gaming, and also made the industry grow up and become not only a form of entertainment, but also tell stories, and become intrincate works of art.
It's obvious that while Apple is taking efforts to increase their revenue on gaming, they're not doing the right things (otherwise, they would be thriving next to Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft). The latest iPad Pro can easily reach PS4-level graphics (and even the iPhone 13, really). The hardware's powerful at a native, so the problem is clearly not the hardware.
Apple's efforts are like preparing for a marathon with the goal of being a professional cook: it's a lot of effort, but it's never going to happen because it's not the
right type of effort. Of course, I'm exaggerating a little bit to get my point across.
That has already been discussed here, but developers want a guarantee that their software will remain supported. Apple Silicon is already a niche, so porting costs extra; imagine if a developer finds out 2 years later Apple discontinued Metal to favor, say, their shiny "Topaz" gaming API. In the gaming world, Apple has the history of trying to push developers to adopt new technologies libraries, only to discontinue them later. It doesn't exactly make developers feel assured.
Not only that, but Apple is not collaborating to make sure games will work in other platforms. On the contrary: they are deliberately breaking compatibility because they are (or were) confident their machines are so powerful people will move from the legacy x86 / x64 platform to Apple Silicon. But it's not going to happen. I was expecting that Mac machines would be so blazingly fast with their extra cores that they'd be able to provide compatibility based on their sheer power, but so far, those 16-32 cores only seem to provide a significant speed boost on specific audio / video tasks (i.e, audio / video rendering and ecoding).