Well my overall answer to this topic is that I'd like to see 3DGS arrive in this decade. In my opinion there has to be a turn of tides in terms of the general orientation. I mean look at the homepage and read what's there - there are quite some things where you notice that the mentality of 3DGS got stuck many years ago. As an example:

That is said pretty much at the beginning of the engine description on the homepage. This worked back in the days when software like Blender didn't exist or wasn't nowhere as advanced as it is today and where professional software like MAX did cost a lot more than it does today. I mean think about it - here they try to encourage their potential customers to use MED instead of whatever else they are using. These times simply are over. THIS is how the industry works nowadays. You fire up your software, you create a high- and low-poly model, you create a diffuse, specular and normal map plus maybe animations or even LOD stages (if you don't want to use engine internal LOD systems). Then you take your asset and expect the engine to accept all of this with no sweat. This is where 3DGS in my opinion falls flat as it never really adapted to this trend...

I mean this is no AAA magic. Pretty much everyone expects an engine to immediately handle a model with a normal and specular map. That also becomes a problem when looking at the editions: The Extra version (you pay 100 € for) has no shaders - they don't become available until the 199$ Com edition. I think this really is horrible as we in my opinion now really are talking about the most basic tech level an engine should deliver nowadays and I'm not even mentioning that the handling of said shaders also by far isn't that "self-evident" even if you have the Com edition. 3DGS needs a "fire and forget" solution here. You want to use a diffuse, normal and specular map? No sweat - just tell which textures to use and here we go. Works with the lights you add and in general is a no brainer. That especially is needed for those "beginners" the homepage also talks of who are meant to use prefabs in order to click together their games...

This sort of also applies to the resource packer. I still don't get it why you need to buy the Pro edition just to prevent people from seeing your raw files. Not mentioning that this leaves an extremely unprofessional impression...

Maybe a small addendum to me quoting the 3DGS homepage as this probably should be the first and most easy thing to fix. There are quite some sections that should be revised or even removed. I'll name just two examples I won't even comment on:



So with 3DGS getting a new orientation what would I like to see? Well at first I think it's way too late for the mobile market and the Acknex engine also lacks certain qualities to really compete. I know that this actually is in development but I really doubt that this is what 3DGS desperately needs right now. There simply are so many competitors from specialized lightweight solutions to full sized allround engines like Unity all offering very efficient workflows and literally years of experience with those mobile platforms. I don't think mobile deployment for 3DGS ever will go beyond a "nice to have" feature for the majority of users...

I think 3DGS should aim for a niche. It's no use trying to compete with an engine like Unity with its in comparison insane level of workpower nor has it big chances on the mobile market as there don't just exist competitors like Unity but also all those smaller engines already (I can't remember good examples right now but there for example exist engines just made for 2D games which are very efficient at their job both in terms of performance as well as workflow for such games). In the end I can imagine 3DGS going down the "FPS Creator" route where it aims for newbies. What would be needed here are good editors together with good templates. The editors (hopefully) already are changing to give a way better / more modern workflow and the templates always have been there too although they should be a bit less tedious to use and understand. Basically this would be about what Unity sort of offers when thinking of those Kits they sell in their asset store. Things like ORK or the Playmaker are what I have in mind here. Especially the later with easy to understand node based development is nice (and sells well) and sort of ideal for the development for newbies as it offers way more potential / influence than just applying template scripts. 3DGS should opt for such easy non-programming methods. I think THIS LE3 Flowgraph video shows how nice such a node base system works and gives extremely easy access to gameplay logic without a single line of script. I also think 3DGS especially needs this as counterpart to the lite-C scripting which as this proprietary C-like language really isn't all that appealing to programming newcomers...

EDIT:
Maybe as small addendum: Once 3DGS would reach a state where it has those nice editors, nice node based non-programming system and extensive templates together with some tunes to the featureset going for the mobile platforms might make sense as people would be able to create not too complex games in no time. "One step after another" is what counts here though and so the basis for this high attractiveness for creating simple games should exist before the relevant export options. Having them now means that all engine changes already have to be double checked if things still work for the mobile platforms (eating up development time 3DGS doesn't have in abundance) thus slowing the development plus the platforms we get now might not exist in that shape when all those nice engine / editor features are done (which again means precious development time taken away in order to update the exporters to the latest iOS, Android or whatever version)...

So this is not about me hating mobile platforms but I think that there are so many competitors in this market that a newcomer needs a good concept / good reasons in order to somehow stand out and I don't see such a potential for the current 3DGS...