> It would be very much its own entity, providing the Sprite, Tiled Background, 9 Patch and other common plugins.
I just don't think it's worth going to a colossal amount of effort for something which only supports a subset of features. It is a compatibility and portability nightmare and is just one step towards the insane feature support matrices that some tools have - pick any three features and there may only be one or two platforms out of the full range that support it... or maybe even no platform is available which supports them all!
Besides, what is the proposed benefit of the native engine? Is it performance? asm.js would be a better idea. Is it v-sync quality? That's being fixed. What is it that you're after and why do you think it's better to ditch the entire web platform rather than improve it?
Well, to me it would be worth it. Seeing the power of Construct Classic married to the usablity, stability and flow of the C2 editor is kind of a personal wet dream. Portability be damned!
When it comes to what I actually want to develop, relying on the web platform appears as a great hinderance. I'd like to target dektop platforms and I'd like to do so without the artificial step of putting the game into some browser. Which achieves nothing but make the performance fragile and especially effects very expensive.
I have seen asm.js mentioned a few times already and it does seem promising. But please understand that for someone who isn't even interested in targeting every hipster's smartphone, going native would just be a very reasonable step.
And again I do not ask Scirra to do this (mainly because I know it won't happen), but it doesn't hurt to just throw the general idea out there.