If blender were to shift it's focus to one field of CG...

I don’t think there’s any need to ditch elements of the program to focus on anything specific at this point. There’s obviously some areas that I personally wouldn’t use much, if ever. But the fact they exist goes a long way towards making Blender what it is. Initially I wouldn’t have experimented with animation for example. I confined myself to modeling mostly. But by the time I took up an interest in it, for modding, the facility was there. Same with texture painting. Not something I used initially. But something I now use regularly, even if it is starting to gather some dust.

There’s something for a range of interests. Which I suppose you could argue is an up and a downside. But it does make it accessible. Especially if you’re not interested in pirating. In it’s current state it’s a platform that offers as much as a commercial application. Flawed perhaps. But not so much that it will stop the user from creating something wonderful.

The foundation I think should stick to what they’re doing, but refine the generic aspects. A lot of the things Almatap mentioned.

It’s interesting nobody has selected medical purposes.
Take a look of Mike Pan’s work on viruses http://blog.mikepan.com/post/147011802066/google-expeditions-education-in-vr
He also made a zika virus 3d model.
I would be interested in simulations, computations and visualizations in mathematics, physics and astronomy. For example, here is modeled collision of two galaxies via PS and force fields.
I think that combining procedural workflows, motion graphics and features between particles,splines and meshes,
Blender could provide educational, scientific and art purposes, altogether.