Sure, it would be surprising to learn that big projects are underway on an Armory not even in v1
However, it would be clearer to have concrete performance test results from you to share with us, as for example benchmark between something in C++/UE4 and Haxe/Armory.
It reminds me of the old chapel debates between Assembler vs C, then C vs C++, then C++/Python …
To perform an impartial test, it’s necessary to identify and rework some parts before, like in the case of Haxe/Logic Nodes/Armory test, it could be possible to rework zones like excess object allocations, CPU-intensive bottlenecks, timer nodes, look at C++ code generated by Haxe, etc. that can lead to large performance gaps.
But to return to the Blender/Armory/Haxe production line, what is extremely promising with Armory is the continuity of the production line. All in one.
For example, you know as well as I do that currently exporting a mesh/squellette between Blender and Unreal can become a nightmare.
Then the approach of the current Engine games is via a series of animation sequences … that’s good but I’m not sure it’s the best approach in the long run. This is too much like an evolution of the sprites approach of the past and we have GPU that could benefit with others better approach.
I think Armory’s chance is to be able to keep away from these legacies and rethink things from top to bottom with new, innovative and simpler techniques, more in phase with the AI progress and the power of GPU cards to massively parrallelise things.
Thus I think that the Armory principle can lead to a real disruption in relation to the current offer of the major of this sector.
Although the Blender open-source community is a supporter of this initiative, Lubos must already offer a correct V1 base on a solid base to create an ecosystem that can attract talents around him and Armory for the future. History repeats itself.
But this leads us too far from the original question that remains "relations beetween what we set in Pose Mode in Blender and then can do in it, and Armory (in terms of reusability)?