3 ms·

I would prefer to understand why a paused or backgrounded game still manages to consume a ton of CPU or GPU Like, you're still just churning away at the main g

I would prefer to understand why a paused or backgrounded game still manages to consume a ton of CPU or GPU Like, you're still just churning away at the main game loop while literally nothing else is happening except for you waiting for me to unpause it? Because THAT would be an actual achievement. Hell, I can suspend any process from the Unixy side of things by sending a SIGSTOP signal, for a far more perfect "pause". If I was a game dev, I would not settle for "looks like paused, but still burning down the environment and heating up my home as a side effect"

MrGilbert 6mo ago
But if you were a game dev, you would understand why it‘s not as easy as it seems to outsiders. :)
- pmarreck 6mo ago
  I'm not saying it would be trivial, but I bet that once you figure out a workable pattern, you could replicate that on other games. One idea that might be relatively easy to implement- Slow the framerate down to something super slow instead of fully stopping
  - thunderfork 6mo ago
    Ah, but now your pause menu feels like total garbage to use!
    - account42 6mo ago
      You can adjust the frame rate based on whether the user is actually interacting with the window and whether the window is currently not shown at all. This is not hard to do at all, burning CPU and CPU cycles just to show a static frame (or nothing at all while the window is minimized) just means the developer doesn't care.
GuB-42 6mo ago
Because the engine is still running, even in a paused state, the game still has to show something and process input. Sometimes there is a menu too, sometimes the game is not completely frozen: flames may flicker for instance. In the article, there is a case where the game takes a screenshot and disable costly rendering, presumably to deal with this problem. But the thing is that most games are designed to to be actively played, not paused for extended periods of time and having an active pause for a couple of minutes isn't going to destroy the environment. For backgrounding, is is common for games to run at a much slower framerate to save resources.

MrGilbert 6mo ago

But if you were a game dev, you would understand why it‘s not as easy as it seems to outsiders. :)

pmarreck 6mo ago
I'm not saying it would be trivial, but I bet that once you figure out a workable pattern, you could replicate that on other games. One idea that might be relatively easy to implement- Slow the framerate down to something super slow instead of fully stopping
- thunderfork 6mo ago
  Ah, but now your pause menu feels like total garbage to use!
  - account42 6mo ago
    You can adjust the frame rate based on whether the user is actually interacting with the window and whether the window is currently not shown at all. This is not hard to do at all, burning CPU and CPU cycles just to show a static frame (or nothing at all while the window is minimized) just means the developer doesn't care.

GuB-42 6mo ago

Because the engine is still running, even in a paused state, the game still has to show something and process input. Sometimes there is a menu too, sometimes the game is not completely frozen: flames may flicker for instance. In the article, there is a case where the game takes a screenshot and disable costly rendering, presumably to deal with this problem. But the thing is that most games are designed to to be actively played, not paused for extended periods of time and having an active pause for a couple of minutes isn't going to destroy the environment. For backgrounding, is is common for games to run at a much slower framerate to save resources.