At the time of Wii and Xbox 360, I was the kind of person that collected tech devices that had new features. I'd be an early adopter for a lot of things, because of the exciting idea of how those things would grow over time. Now I'm the exact opposite. I want minimalist, no frills. I do not pursue upgrades. I'm going to drag my phone as far into the future as it'll go. Things like heartbeat sensors don't get me excited. I'll let someone else be the early adopter, and if it has some utility then I'll buy in.
You mean as you got older you got less versatile and willing to try new things, like every single human who ages?
One example* doesn't prove your point. There are other cases where people have said, "this is rubbish," when it has been. Like the DS4 light-bar and the WiiU second screen.
Those are implementations that people think are rubbish?.
- The DS4's light-bar enabled the PS4's standard controller to be used as a VR controller, which in turn enabled Sony to have the most successful VR platform in the world. It's something the XBone could never achieve once they got rid of mandatory Kinect.
The gyroscope+accelerometer is also extensively used in PSVR, which
B3D apparently also hates.
- The Wii U's second screen was considered rubbish by whom? IIRC the idea was considered pretty great, but it was hampered by 1) terrible marketing and console shape that made people think the new console was an accessory to the Wii, and 2) nintendo being cheap asses on processing hardware that turned the home console into a relative potato once the new gens were out.
I certainly don't remember anyone saying
ew I can keep playing my games when I go to bed or the toilet? I can have a second screen with HUD elements so it doesn't have to appear in the TV making it more immersive? This is rubbish!
Unless you're talking about console BoM economics which is very obviously out of the scope of 99.99% of console gamers, therefore irrelevant.
It seems that so far, DS4 features that B3D considers
rubbish had pretty good outcomes, so I guess B3D's preferences are a great indicator of success. As long as you reverse the results.
you instead present some use-cases and a good argument as to why this is a good idea?
Once you get a base (resting) level for your heartrate, increases in its pace will reveal:
- Stress levels on difficult situations with lots of movement (e.g. battling incoming hordes of enemies)
- Frustration on difficult situations without movement (e.g. trying to break puzzles)
- Fear levels on suspense situation like horror games.
Reversely, a heartbeat that is always close to your baseline means low levels of alertness, meaning the player might be getting bored and less engaged.
Game designers can adjust the number and/or hit points of the incoming hordes in action games, as they want the player to be engaged enough while not feeling too stressed (which causes fatigue). Or perhaps they do want the player to feel stressed during a certain period of time.
On adventure games with puzzles, an indicator of frustration may tell the game it's time to release some extra clues so the player won't quit.
Horror games can choose to shove the monster in the player's face at the best time possible, which is when the heartbeat is at its baseline and their alertedness is low. (IIRC Nintendo wanted to use the Vitality Sensor with an Eternal Darkness remake.)
Player emotions on videogames have always been an open circuit of throwing in whatever the devs hoped that would create reactions on the players.
Once games get an input that gives clues to the game engine of the player's emotions, we now have a semi closed control loop that feeds the game on how successful it's being in generating the intended emotions, and change parameters accordingly.
It has the potential to change things a lot.
