>>19 there are a few reasons why it's "hard" ya software is pretty shit, and it shows no signs of getting better, but it's hard to actually design things to work in parallel. the closest things we have to a C equivalent for parallel programming is like cuda, which... isn't really a C analog. in hardware design we constantly need to define parallel processes, manage timing, pipelining, etc. but in software we have to use static hardware that works specific ways, and then kludge in parallel communication modes using threads through sometimes but not always serial channels. it's a design nightmare, and so a lot of software takes a very conservative approach to multithreading, using it for a few background tasks or something. for example with the 10000000 enemies idea, how do you divide it up. one thread will run too slowly, poor utilization of available hardware. so ok THREADMAX-1 might be good, but that's different on every pc, and so if each thread needs to handle some specific number of enemies then there will be less on less powerful machines. that might be fine, but it could also completely ruin the play experience. you could set a specific number of threads, and run them with some kind of priorities to keep things more or less fluid, but now you need to manage that, and that's extra overhead. the more threads you have the more context switching you need to do so you can't just throw a thread on each enemy.
and so because all this is terribly complicated and dubious in value many don't bother doing any of it. just throw it in the main loop and limit the spawns to some smaller number. clock out and go home to watch the latest star wars slop.
Based