You mean as you got older you got less versatile and willing to try new things, like every single human who ages?
That's insulting. Firstly, not every single human likes new things less and less. Secondly, learning to be able to predict what you do and don't like is just experience. Kids often are desperate to have something, only to find it's rubbish when they get it. That goes for adults too, who can buy products on promise only to be disappointed, but at least the adult's buying decision ahead of acquisition tends to be more grounded.
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.
So it's only useful for PSVR. That's about 6% of the PS4 population. And before PSVR was released, it had effectively no use. So when people were complaining they didn't want a light bar because it was a poor feedback system placed in the wrong place, glares off the TV, and drains the battery, what they should have been doing was imagining a future VR product it'd be perfect for which they wouldn't want?
No, the criticisms against DS4 features were completely justified as 20/20 hindsight shows us. Sony's plans for them didn't amount to anything (they were overly optimistic of their value) and in the end, they only managed to find justification in a small niche.
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.
Okay, look at your justifications and you'll see it's all about the mundane and not the next-gen promise that you're expecting from biosensors. The screen was touch sensitive, so could have bene used for input, and the screen offered a secondary view possibility. What was it actually used for? Continuing your game when the TV was in use and showing a UI that could as readily be put on the screen and not need you to take your eyes away from it. Whether you value those things or not, the next-gen features hoped for never happened. Exactly the same as the next-gen features of DS4.
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.
This is the only part of the discussion you should have engaged with rather than slagging off the board repeatedly. And these are the sorts of lists we've always created for new tech like Sixaxis motion controls and Wii U secondary screens, only to see reality far more prosaic and nothing become of them.
As for your list, I'd say a primary concern is the accuracy. People's heartrates could be up for reasons outside the game experience, changing gameplay when it isn't appropriate. And then, most importantly for the primary concern of this thread, which devs would go to the effort of implementing those features? Unless you're making a PS exclusive, it's added effort to support the feature that most players won't be able to use. It'll be far more complex to balance adaptive play of this sort due to the test data, and for adaptive games, in game metrics will work for all platforms so you'd be better off doing that then tracking heart-rate on one platform and metrics on 3 or 4 others.
