first of all, i experimented a lot with this Engine and i absolutely love it!
As the engine is, in my view, still under “heavy” development i would suggest/recomment to add WebGPU support as one of the export platforms.
You and WebGPU might get “ready” more or less in the same time, if i compare the raise/roadmap of this engine and WebGPU.
Im sure it would also help your (future) marketing/growth to implement it
For example, i would love to see a new, very good engine like this, announcing themself to public as an engine thats easy to use for non coders and for professional coders, which implement latest techs like WebGPU (,Vulkan and co…).
The way to extend your engine is incredible, the visual scripting is beside UE4´s unrivaled!
To be honest, im very sure that many UE4 devs (like me) will switch to your engine, already because of the way you´ve implemented visual scripting so far.
Also the html comunity is bigger as epic expect. Yes, there might be “just” many small devs and not good earning AAA companies using it, but im sure it would be profitable.
HTML is still a thing and will be always a thing. Browsers and Devices become faster and faster day by day, and still many more people own a “web game console” then a pc or a real console…
Also im sure that porting code to java/c++ (android/ios) might become unnecessary in the future because of the power of WebGL/WebGPU. I playd a lot of high performance embedded html only games already on android and android browser (which mostly was done by cocos and pixi.js in my case)
Anyway, depending how to you plan to earn with your project…
I personally would spend money to be able to use a UE4 alternative with (latest) html-tech support and a “lesser” restricted content policy (To be fair, they just changed it recently basically allowing mostly everything, but i still have issues with them, that forces me to switch engine for some projects).