Ubisoft and similar companies limiting frame rates to 30 FPS in games. What are your opinions on this direction?
Ubisoft and similar companies limiting frame rates to 30 FPS in games. What are your opinions on this direction?
I’m getting into PC gaming because I really enjoy smooth 60fps visuals, VSync or FPS caps, and a 360 controller. I’m selling my PS4 and other gear, plus investing in a new rig with a 970 GTX. Recently I’ve read that Ubisoft and some titles like Evil Within are capping at 30fps because they think 60fps feels too much. That’s frustrating since consoles struggle with 60fps. My question is, will newer games such as Far Cry 4, AC Unity, or GTA V keep a 30fps cap? I’ve seen Dead Rising 3 and Evil Within unlock FPS mods, but I’m curious if there are ways to bypass the cap using commands or edits. It’s disappointing that companies limit performance this way. What do you think about NVIDIA’s stance on it? The point of a high-end GPU feels wasted if you can’t enjoy it at all. Looking forward to your thoughts on this issue.
It's the worst idea that has ever happened and it should vanish soon. That's what most of you seem to believe, right?
My perspective is that it’s a major red flag. There are simply too many excellent PC titles with unlocked framerates to worry about games intentionally broken on my platform. Handling PC in this way would likely lead to significant financial losses, in my view. Still, I’ve been emphasizing this point in every discussion lately, and I believe there’s a lot of unnecessary panic around the recent events involving Bethesda and Ubisoft. Do you recall the ports we used to enjoy on the early Xbox 360? Back then, no one discussed it much because broken ports were so frequent that the internet didn’t get overwhelmed when another was capped at 30 FPS. Except for a few rare cases, ports have generally remained stable over time (including with Ubisoft). Just because The Evil Within is locked at 30 doesn’t mean it’s part of a trend.
I won't purchase any AAA titles capped at 30 or nearly any game genuinely. The only excuse for a developer would be a lack of PC experience and moving a console title to PC, which isn't appealing. Time limitations and uncertainty about release timing often push games toward PC later or even after development ends. That's not something I'd accept. Some titles handle higher FPS well, while others like Dark Souls or Need for Speed demand double speed. There are also other speed-related problems—Skyrim’s physics can fail at over 60fps, and FF13 supports 60fps natively but with performance quirks like forced vsync. Resolution restrictions seem to be the main issue here.
I believe this idea has potential. I want to avoid it becoming a model for future titles, but the concept is solid. Console manufacturers compensate developers to restrict game scope, which leads to more balanced excitement across platforms. Greater consistency in hype builds a stronger perception of superiority among console players. Console buyers feel more confident, prompting them to purchase more games from developers. Developers gain extra revenue, allowing more investment in better content for PC. Edit: it resembles a holiday bonus that creators can offer themselves—using an appealing title, story, or characters to launch a poorly made, partially developed game. It reminds me of Watch Dogs and its shortcomings.