Uhm! I'm taking my first read about it! From what I see after a very quick look, there are very good intentions here. It looks like the idea is to create a "Java done right". I am very critical of Java, so that sounds very interesting, but the thing I dislike the most about Java doesn't seem to be in the list of the things that Scala wants to change, ha, ha: the fact that Java forces you to use OOP. On the other hand, it does make several very good points. The code looks much cleaner in Scala and even though it's very OOP, I am kind of able to read it without getting lost (and it's my first look at it).
The lack of dependencies, which you mention, is surely true about Scala, because while I dislike Java, that one also depends only on a Java Virtual Machine and Scala can produce Java byte code, so it should share that property. If I have to mention one thing I do like about Java, it's precisely that and Scala has it too.
It says in the article that Scala is part-OOP/part-functional, but I don't see in the examples non-OOP code because apparently the person who wrote the article likes OOP. I'll continue to read more to have a deeper impression of it

Thanks!
And about the engine... I have to retake this and I'm feeling so lazy! I've been thinking of simplifying the engine and make it load Stunts 3D shapes but make it work always on the ground, without banking (like a classic car engine). From there, I could begin working on the physics... acceleration, breaking, grip, gear torque, etc. Once I can really handle that, I can add the third dimension back again.