Are you suggesting that these movies are boring? Or just that you've seen them all?

Because there are some absolute classics on here that are better than many of the _regular_ modern films. Not to say there aren't good movies worthy of the list, but I don't think emitting them makes the list boring. And if you don't want to watch these films because 'they are old/boring' then I guess that's on you but you are the one missing out.

The list was compiled in 1995?

That is not very surprising, given the list was assembled in 1995, thus 26 years ago.

That being said: many of the films on the list are considered classics for a reason.

I'm getting a bit bored of all the raytracer content on hn. I suppose my problem with it is none of it is especially creative, it's kinda the same maths rendering the same sort of things, except maybe in a different programming style or language.

seems to work well enough for me

Only the switch is.

What do the new PlayStation and Xbox use?

Xbox uses DX12, PlayStation uses a customised version of OpenGL

I thought that WebGL2 didn't have compute shaders. How are you doing this without them?

I use transform feedback, which allows vertex shaders to send data back to the application. You could do this with textures as well, as described by pjmlp. I did this in an earlier version (https://github.com/hut/cellmade#) but it just felt SO WRONG. I was very happy that I found out about transform feedback to be able to do it more cleanly.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebGLTransf...

> The WebGLTransformFeedback interface is part of the WebGL 2 API and enables transform feedback, which is the process of capturing primitives generated by vertex processing. It allows to preserve the post-transform rendering state of an object and resubmit this data multiple times.

You can fake it by misusing textures.

Actually there is a compute shaders extension, but it is only available in certain drivers configurations in Firefox.

Chrome only plans to support WebGPU.

If this needs a digital Ocean server, why not just run the whole thing on that?

Could you go into more detail about how it's idiosyncratic? I'd love to find more information on what it does wrong vs something like vulkan.

For some indication, check out a lot of issue threads for WebGPU (the Rust cross platform graphics library). Many, many features need to be restricted or put behind feature flags due to either lack of Metal support, or Metal having bizarre restrictions compared to other platforms. As a random example, border color is limited to 2 or 3 colors for Metal, and has no restrictions at all for anything else. There are also entire features (like geometry shaders) missing from Metal; for many common usecases you can replicate the functionality with something else, but usually not in a way that easily translates to any of the other APIs (and pretty much nobody on Earth writes games just targeting Macs).

Hence, the easiest thing to do for most games is to just drop Mac support and not worry about it. IMO that's the biggest reason by far why people stopped bothering to port new games to Mac; between not updating OpenGL past 4.1 at best and Metal being so idiosyncratic, it's just not worth it, and since people have learned gaming on Macs sucks (largely because of the outdated and idiosyncratic APIs), most people who want to play games on a Mac have just been installing Windows anyway.

This is all not even to mention that Mac laptops tend to have far too high a resolution for the onboard GPU to perform well for any but the most rudimentary games; hopefully this has been addressed with the M1 batch having a much more powerful GPU. But the issues with Metal remain and will continue to remain until Apple either fixes Metal to make it a more Vulkan-like target, or adds really good Vulkan support.