Developers weren’t really “forced” to support ARM. They simply recognized that all future Macs would be ARM, whereas most new PCs would continue to run on x86. So the incentive to adopt ARM was much weaker on the PC side.
It still surprises me that such behavior is still allowed on modern macOS, which is supposed to be privacy focused. What’s the point of having an app sandbox when it is opt-in?
It is not realistic to expect every game developer to invest a lot of money into security. It's like asking every apartment building to run its own fire department.
The responsibility of securing a platform should not fall on application developers anyway.
Anti-cheat drivers have indeed turned out to be major security risks on Windows. But I think the blame should not be on game developers because kernel-mode anti-cheat is still one of the only methods that’s reasonably effective — and realistically, you can’t expect every game studio to have the expertise to write secure, reliable kernel drivers.
If Microsoft wants Windows to be more stable and secure, they should provide built-in anti-cheat support in the OS. That would reduce the need for third-party kernel drivers in the first place.