vested interests against it
>>105686241 (OP)Developers are lazy to drop directx and Xbox requires directx anyway
the only thing I can think of that went wrong was ml. what could have been...
>>105686348considering what vulkan is, yes, it's going well. are you one of those opengl purists or something.
>>105686348Literally every windows game on Linux is a vulkan game.
>having worse adoption than the previous API it was supposed to replace is doing well
>>105686387again, it's doing relatively well. i don't get what's so hard to understand.
API that no one wants to use is not doing well
>>105686509do you think i didn't know people don't want to use it or something?
>muh popularity argument
Your life is devoid of meaning. Stop attempting to infect others with your misery.
There's no reason to use Vulkan when dxvk and MoltenVK exist.
>>105686572What the fuck do you think MoltenVK is? Hint: it doesn't let you run Metal binaries on Vulkan.
>i-it's not that i wanted this public API to be used by public, baka!
>>105686241 (OP)allowed the steamdeck/linux gaming to to exist with the directX to vulkan translation layer?
>>105686348If DirectX is the popular one why do like almost all of those graphics programming tutorials try to teach OpenGL?
>>105686662DirectX chads don't need no tutorial.
They read the specs.
>>105686241 (OP)Developers are retarded, see unreal engine
imagine if instead of having sql server, you were provided with key-value storage library and had to build your own sql server on top of it.
that's vulkan. it's not a graphics api per se, but a set of graphics primitives.
>>105687138also, the idea of vulkan as middleware doesnt make much sense, because making graphics API in user space is a wrong abstraction layer.
>>105686348Direct X does so much more than graphics, so you're comparing lemons with limes.