[nottorp]

> Unity is locked to a horrifically ancient version of mono and still manages to do a lot of work in a small period of time

Unity is the great battery killer!

The last example I remember is that I could play the first xcom remake (which had a native mac version) on battery for 3-4 hours, while I was lucky to get 2 hours for $random_unity_based_indie with less graphics.

[maccard]

In my defence, I never said it was efficient! Games always suck for battery because they’re constantly rendering.

[Narishma]

> Games always suck for battery because they’re constantly rendering.

Only the badly designed ones.

[M95D]

They don't need to. Enable v-sync.

[maccard]

That’s still 60 times a second on my iPhone and 120 on my Samsung

[nottorp]

Competently done games have vsync and also a fps limiter.

They also decouple game logic and input from drawing :)

And then we have those that thing "OMG BIGGER FPS" is better and burn your video card when they render the startup menu at 1480 fps...

[maccard]

I’m well aware how to make games, thanks, I’m the tech director on a AAA game with 15 years working on them.

I said “constantly” rendering and you and everyone seem to have taken the least charitable interpretation of what I said and decided I couldn’t possibly know what I’m talking about.

[jamiejquinn]

Sorry to ressurect but having just experimented with reducing redundant renders in my own game, which isn't even fully real-time, I'm with you. Trying to know when a game may or may not need a new render is a tricky problem, glitchy if done poorly, and ultimately battery life in games seems like a (high priority) nice-to-have... Shame you're getting flack from folk that clearly haven't ever shipped a game.

[M95D]

Well then, what are you talking about? Maybe my english isn't good enough.