It's both technically and economically unviable for Apple.

For one, Intel's x86 IP is covered by lots of patents and licensing agreements (including with AMD) and Apple wouldn't want to encumber themselves with that. Hence making their own GPUs and modems.

For two, the M-series CPUs already have extensions which improve x86 emulation performance in Rosetta.

For three, Rosetta is already slated for removal in a macOS version or two. Apple don't look backwards, they expect users and devs to move on with them after the transition period - like 32-bit code, PowerPC Rosetta, Classic environment.

Even if Rosetta wasn't being removed, everyone should still want native ARM software because these are fast, efficient CPUs and any form of emulation will harm that. And dedicated SIP blocks would only confuse the market.

For four, Boot Camp was a selling point when the Mac and OS X were still far behind Windows in terms of software support, so dual booting and virtualization was a selling point. Now many apps are cross-platform or web-based and Microsoft's strangehold on computing is reduced. A Mac running Windows was better for Apple than a Dell running Windows, but a Mac running macOS is what Apple wants - that's how they can keep in their ecosystem, charge you (and devs) for apps, and make you evangelical for their battery life.

Five, Apple have never cared much about games. Yeah there are some classics (Marathon...) and the porting toolkit for Metal now, but with the Steam Deck and game streaming being so accessible, I see no reason why Apple would accept the previous 4 cons just to appeal slightly more to a gaming market that Apple don't target and that doesn't really target Apple.

So people are probably downvoting (not me, I don't have enough karma and it wasn't a bad-faith comment!) because it's a far-fetched fantasy which goes directly against Apple's business style and would benefit almost no Mac users.