Why Does Borderlands 4's Optimization Lag While Arc Raiders Shines on Unreal Engine 5?

I'm specifically looking at Gearbox's Borderlands 4 and Embark Studios' Arc Raiders, both powered by Epic Games' Unreal Engine 5. At first glance, one would expect similar performance characteristics, especially given the engine's reputation for cutting-edge visuals. But the reality couldn't be further from that expectation, leading many players down the rabbit hole of "why?". Let's break it down.

Recently, Arc Raiders has been making waves for its surprisingly smooth performance. I've seen numerous reports and personal experiences, even from users with older hardware. Take the GTX 1080 Ti, a card that hasn't seen a massive upgrade in years. I'm talking pre-Broxton/BenQ era here. Some users are claiming they hit 90 FPS consistently in Arc Raiders. That's genuinely impressive, especially considering the game's ambition and the fact that it's built on a modern engine. It suggests Embark made some very effective choices, perhaps right from the start of development, regarding visual fidelity versus performance accessibility. Getting 90 FPS on that hardware is a benchmark that makes you sit up and take notice.

Now, flip the script and look at Borderlands 4. The comparisons are inevitable, and the results are... less rosy. The same hardware that handles Arc Raiders at a snail's pace often struggles dramatically with Gearbox's latest entry. I've heard whispers of frame rates plummeting, stuttering, and systems feeling like they're about to spontaneously combust. It's not just anecdotal; it's a genuine player experience issue that impacts the game's enjoyment. While Arc Raiders showcases Unreal Engine 5's power in a relatively performant package, Borderlands 4 feels like the engine's wilder, more demanding side has taken the reins.

So, what's the disconnect? Is it simply a matter of one game being inherently more graphically taxing than the other? It's tempting to point fingers at the engine itself, as Unreal Engine 5 is often the subject of both praise and criticism regarding its demands. Some developers tout its Nanite system for virtualized geometry, allowing incredibly detailed worlds without crippling performance hits, while others highlight Lumen for its dynamic global illumination, creating stunningly realistic lighting but potentially taxing CPU resources. However, the simple truth, as pointed out by players and developers alike, is that the engine is merely the canvas. It's the brushstrokes of the developers that truly determine the final image quality and, crucially, the level of optimization.

This brings us to the heart of the matter: developer expertise and choices. Embark Studios seems to have prioritized performance right from the ground up for Arc Raiders. They've reportedly chosen not to implement certain cutting-edge features like Nanite and Lumen. Now, I'll be honest, skipping Nanite or Lumen sounds like a significant trade-off. Those features are part of what makes Unreal Engine 5 cutting-edge, allowing for incredible detail in environments and dynamic lighting. But performance-wise, sometimes less truly is more. By opting out of these features, Embark has likely significantly reduced the complexity of the rendering pipeline, making the game more manageable across a wider range of hardware. It’s a calculated risk, choosing visual fidelity in some areas for raw, playable performance in others.

Conversely, Gearbox with Borderlands 4 appears to have taken a different path. They are clearly leveraging the full graphical potential of Unreal Engine 5, pushing the limits of what the engine can do. The game looks stunning, as expected from a Gearbox title. But this visual splendor comes at a cost. The implementation of Nanite and Lumen, along with other advanced engine features, seems to be having a substantial negative impact on performance, particularly on mid-range and older hardware. The engine's capabilities are being stretched to their absolute limits, and the results are a demanding, often frustrating, experience for many players. It feels like they aimed for maximum visual fidelity first and considered optimization somewhat later in the development cycle, if at all for the initial launch.

This situation highlights a crucial point about modern game engines. They are incredibly powerful tools, capable of producing stunning visuals, but they are not magic wands. The performance is heavily dependent on how the developers use those tools. It's about making informed decisions about which features to enable, how aggressively to use them, and potentially even customizing the engine's core rendering code. Optimization isn't just a checkbox item at the end of development; it needs to be woven into the fabric of the game's creation from the very beginning. Arc Raiders seems to be the product of that philosophy, delivering a polished experience that prioritizes smooth gameplay.

Ultimately, the performance gap between these two Unreal Engine 5 titles serves as a valuable lesson. It underscores that while the engine provides the foundation and incredible tools, the developers are the ones wielding the tools and shaping the final product. Their technical skill, design choices, and commitment to optimization directly influence how well the game runs. The next time you hear about optimization issues in a new game, remember it's rarely just the engine's fault; it's often about how the talented individuals at that development studio chose to build the game. It's a reminder that behind every graphical marvel is a complex balance of art and engineering, and sometimes, striking the right balance is more challenging than it looks.