Recently, I wrapped up the campaigns of four games: Borderlands 4, Bloodlines 2, The Outer Worlds 2, and Dying Light: The Beast.
And finishing The Beast left me with a feeling I didn’t expect—one that’s a little sad.
Before diving into performance, it’s worth sharing my PC specs. They’re not cutting-edge, but they’re nowhere near low-end either. In 2025, running 1080p games, I’d confidently call this setup decent. Reasonably capable. Not extravagant. Not obsolete.
Check out my other article: Dying Light 2 Modding Tutorial
Now, back to the point. Out of the four games, only Dying Light: The Beast ran at a steady 118–120 FPS without Frame Generation—basically 99% of the time.
The Outer Worlds 2 wasn’t terrible either; it dipped in busy areas, but I didn’t spend too long fine-tuning the graphics. Once dialed in, the game sat comfortably between 90–160 FPS.
Borderlands 4, however, was a different story. It took the most tweaking—both in-game and outside of it. Shader cache adjustments, settings experiments… you name it, I tried it. Even with Frame Generation, micro-stutters still crept in. The game was playable, even smooth at times, but never consistently so.
And then there’s Bloodlines 2, easily the worst performer of the bunch. Despite being a relatively simple game in both mechanics and scale, it crawled at 40–50 FPS without FG. For a title this light, the performance gap was honestly baffling.
To be fair, games get patched. Performance improves. But the updates aren’t really the heart of what I want to say.
A Pattern That’s Hard to Ignore
From a visual standpoint, I’d actually argue The Outer Worlds 2 stands as the most stunning. The Beast and Borderlands 4 are comparable—though BL4 still suffers from that distracting pixelated snow texture. And Bloodlines 2’s visuals… well, they’re hardly worth discussing at this point.
But here’s what makes The Beast stand out:
It’s the only game on this list not built on Unreal Engine 5.
DLTB uses the same tech as Dying Light 2, a game from 2022. It was originally developed as a DLC before becoming its own standalone release. In other words, the technology underneath is three years old.
And that’s exactly what makes the situation so concerning.
Because visually, you wouldn’t guess that. Most players wouldn’t look at The Beast and think, “Ah, yes—clearly a 2022 engine.” The graphical leap from 2022 to 2025 isn’t even noticeable to the naked eye.
But the performance difference?
That part is painfully obvious.
Games are running worse. Noticeably worse. And often, embarrassingly so.
Is Unreal Engine 5 Really the Culprit?
Many PC gamers already know UE5 is notoriously difficult to optimize. Not all UE5 titles struggle, but the pattern is there. Some studios make it work—Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 comes to mind—but many others don’t.
And yet, developers keep adopting UE5 anyway. Why?
Licensing incentives?
Industry pressure?
Development pipelines already locked in?
Maybe all of the above.
But UE5 isn’t the only example.
Franchises like Call of Duty and Battlefield, once the gold standard for AAA visuals, didn’t push visual boundaries at all in 2025. Black Ops 7 and Battlefield 6 look… fine. Good, even. But not new. Not groundbreaking. Not what these franchises used to represent.
If You’d Like to Explore More: If We Know Better, Why Don’t We Work Better?
Why Are We Slowing Down?
Maybe hardware companies shifting toward AI plays a role. Both NVIDIA and AMD openly position themselves as AI companies now. Maybe that focus diverts energy—research, optimization, ambition—away from gaming.
Maybe developers are adopting newer engines they can’t fully utilize yet.
Maybe there simply hasn’t been a meaningful leap in real-time visual technology since 2022.
Or maybe… we’re nearing the ceiling.
I don’t know the exact answer. Maybe no one does yet.
But as we close out 2025, I can’t help but hope 2026 brings a turnaround—better optimization, better stability, and games that feel as good to play as they look.
What do you think?
Do you see the same trend I’m seeing?
Why do you believe this is happening?
