Erm... This is beating around the bush after its empty (or at least feels like it) and of course, welcome to PGD glib, but I can't help noticing:

[QUOTE]

  1. Every platform supports it (PC, Consoles).
  2. Everyone already knows it.
  3. One way or another it does everything you need it to.

1. Pascal (and dialects) are supported on GBA/NDS/ARM/X84/X86_64/Wii/GameCube/PS2/Xbox. Thats most of them done is it not? There are rumours about the PS3/PSP
2. If your school where you learnt C/C++ did not teach you pascal - I'd be surprised. Aside, Pascal is C/C++ just without the confusing syntax no?
3. What does pascal not do one way or the other?
The old arguement was the C/C++ was faster than pascal - now if we benchmark the new C variants that are in the Visual Studio suites its hard to find one instance where .NET is left out of it - and .Net is not exactly the fastest horse in the race...

I guess you could always use the XNA and framework argument - BUT I find pascal easy enough to use we don't need a framework like XNA to make it easier, plus we have the Direct3d bindings if thats what floats your boat...

My problem with flash is that the (cough cough) supplied (choke) hardware arghhhh-celeration is dodgy at best... My ATI HD4330 plays a lot of games in med/high, yet battles with some flash games!?! Sort of the same problem for Java. I mean, how does C&C3 in med/high use less power than miniclip?

Not saying you're wrong or anything, just continuing the jist of the thread - C/C++ is just chosen out of popularity over pascal, its not really down to propper reason in many cases.