Quote - - Remove or prohibit all "impossible" possibilities in the material room.

And the fun dies.  :lol:

Unless we're given tools to create mathematically-correct and "possible" materials, tools which are as accessible and obvious and straighforward as playfully linking nodes in the current Materials Room to see what happens, then Poser will have taken a step backwards.  Some of us need to develop shaders through experimentation.  Some of us rely on "impossible" shaders in our regular Poser work because there is no apparent way to achieve the desired rendering effect while remaining mathematically correct.

I've noted elsewhere that I can imagine two scenarios that might make Poser unusable for me, driving me away after my fifteen years with the program.  One is complete and total removal of Python scripting.  The other is if they make the Materials Room inaccessible to a dummy like myself.  Allowing us to create and render bizarre and impossible shaders furthers creativity.  I've long been frustrated by the way that those advocating a "correct" way in Poserdom seem to want to strip away other options in the process.  Why do they do that, I wonder?  Poser is a fabulous creative tool, and it's all illusion anyway.  Options are good for creativity.

To answer the question in the OP, I think I found Poser 7 to be the most fun, but I should note that I skipped Poser 6.  Poser 7 was a more stable and reliable upgrade, for me at least, than most of the others have been.  Far fewer crashes.  That one was fun to use.  Of course, I go back to it now from time to time, and can't adjust to using the old GUI again.  :lol:

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking.  He apologizes for this.  He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below.  His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.