Sledge is correct. Blitz3D appeal was simplicity. If we wanted something open-ended, then we could go back to C/C++ or .NET these days with full DX9 and a wealth of free and license based SDKs. Blitz3D was an all in one tool to get decent products out with. No one was going to write the next greatest FPS on it, but a good looking prototype or indie game was very possible in 2D or 3D or hybrid.
If Mark would of wrote Blitz3D v2, with DX9 (shaders) support, added the OOP, kept the sound engine in, and hopefully fixed the IDE - I can almost guarantee that it would of sold.. and sold well. With Max, it is almost like we are re-inventing the wheel of C/C++ but in Basic syntax... why?
But, it is too late. Plus, we don't FULLY know why Mark did what he did and he might have a great reason for it. I don't believe that Mark should necessarily be influenced by our opinions - although, even the greatest minds have gone down a wrong path by not listening to opinions and advice of others. (Thomas Edison believed in DC rather than AC)
If Mark would of wrote Blitz3D v2, with DX9 (shaders) support, added the OOP, kept the sound engine in, and hopefully fixed the IDE - I can almost guarantee that it would of sold.. and sold well. With Max, it is almost like we are re-inventing the wheel of C/C++ but in Basic syntax... why?
But, it is too late. Plus, we don't FULLY know why Mark did what he did and he might have a great reason for it. I don't believe that Mark should necessarily be influenced by our opinions - although, even the greatest minds have gone down a wrong path by not listening to opinions and advice of others. (Thomas Edison believed in DC rather than AC)