my point was not to change the way/method of how things work in zbrush, merely to take whats there and organise it into something more intuitive.
+1 not follow the logic of other apps?
Is that to say you wouldn’t consider using texture maps and curves to control material attributes within zbrush a plus?
Attributes which already exist, and functions already present.
To clarify, instead of pluging materials into materials, why not plug attributes into materials?
Thats what I’m driving at 
Its fine to have zbrush as a totally ‘unique’ app. Just means that for artists with access to other apps for rendering and texturing and most importantly concept and look development. Zbrush won’t be used as widely outside of modeling which is still its strongest feature.
The die hard fans will cling on, but to be honest better and faster results can be acheived outside of zbrush with regard to rendering and texturing even if only for concepting. I dislike jumping from app to app which is why I think pixologic should look at how to upgrade the way materials are used, a ‘less is more’ approach.
Mainly how to utilise less attributes to create a look for your model, be it organic or hard surface. Once you start overloading the amount of ‘tweaks’ and ‘attributes’ you use to develop a look the harder and it becomes to translate, therefore becoming a waste of time.
I think that keeps in check with the philosophy of ‘Artist Friendly’
Would you also say having a 64bit version is too inline with the ‘logic’ of other apps? Coz thats a big draw back too.
