Nuvendil said:
First off, you can't just look at the "texture", which is the 2d image itself. You have to look at how the textures react to light. This is how you spot bump maps, normal maps, etc. The materials in Octopath feature more of such maps than the 3DS games you mention. And quite detailed ones at that, as the cave screenshot shows. The texture itself is based on pixel art but the materials feature use of much more modern elements. Also, polygon counts for the environment actually can climb higher than some of the games you mentioned very easily. The Bravely games especially. You are also ignoring the presence of a far, far, far more robust post processing pipeline than any 3DS game can even have. The lighting, rendering, effects, shadows, all these are in an entirely different league than the games you mentioned. This is made in Unreal Engine 4 and they are making use of it's capabilities in the area of post processing quite well. The gap in this area between Octopath and those games you mentioned is far beyond anything you can brush off with the 3D mode. Octopath is just plain graphically more advanced than any of the games you listed. Except maybe a couple where the advantage in polygonal complexity is really really high but even then, those games come up extremely short in other areas. |
Ok, yeah, I didn't think about them applying material maps all over the place. 3D mode can't really compare to lighting + specular maps, + bumpmaps + particle effects combined. Octopath is still just a 3DS game with a bunch of modern game engine features turned on though. And having experience with making games, I can tell you that for a lot of these post processing features, it involves little more work than checking a box in engine.
