Yes but you can assign one friction factor only to each texture i.e either grass or sand, for example
In 3dgs you can even read and manipulate each pixel of the texture
You can for example paint an irregularly shaped sand road on a grass terrain
In the gameplay you can detect if your hovercraft is on the road or on the grass
I dont think that this extreme flexibility is allowed to Unity users

Once again , ok for shaders and all the graphic stuff but a game must be first all:

Interactivity

Apart from that, generally speaking ,I agree that Unity workflow and programming language is better than 3dgs
However it seems to me that it is the direct opposite as far as the set of commands are concerned
Every new release 3dgs supplies some new commands
From this point of view I agree that 3dgs is more programming oriented than Unity

On the other hand I can not really understand how someone can claim that the Lite_c / action / entity based 3dgs architecture is better than the C# / JavaScript components Unity based architecture



Maybe these people are simply more familiar with 3dgs than with Unity