Or at least the frame capping part of it. As a cpu-level fps limiter, it is one of the best external ways to limit fps, and it can be done to games currently running as well. It seems like it would be a perfect fit for a feature built into Steam, which is one of the biggest places to game on PC. Through Steam's big picture mode you can already edit a game's controller config on a game-by-game basis while in that game, so it would be amazing to be able to just shift+tab or hit the middle button on a controller and be able to select an option to set an fps cap (or disable) whilst in-game still, and without having to manually add games or have some limiter always on in the background. Well, that's just my opinion, anyway. Would bring easier frame capping options to more people.
Capping frames is an advanced user's thing. Steam itself is not aimed at advanced users. For that there's Vsync.
Why not both? It doesn't have to be exclusive. And as for advanced users, why not try and make such a thing more easily accessible to more people?
Because "making it availbale" costs money. Money they might not be interested to invest for a features the majority of gamers doesn't even use. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy it exists and that it's developed, but in a business world they just don't think the whole day about stuff like this that they could offer. "Sharing" and your "social experience" is much more important, better update your profile with achievements to show off than to make you play games with technical extras.
I would never forgive Valve if they brought it on to Steam (most of those features are already builtin with AMD Radeon Settings...) also I just don't see it as a viable solution.
AMD GPus aren't exactly a majority though. And why wouldn't a frame capper built into Steam for easy (optional) usage not be a viable solution?
