Now post how much each of them made relative to their budget, it don't matter jack shit if a game sold 100 million units if the budget for it was 1 billion
This man is generally correct, but I want to highlight this.
A huge amount of the issue are browns with low IQ and even lower impulse control. I would posit that you can near-directly correlate the decline of gaming with the increase in accessibility to minority groups.
PSN only covers 69 countries.
Steam is pretty much global.
But yeah, I don't trust PSN with my account info.
They're not ethical, and I don't like padding their numbers after they declared war on every game from SEA.
Even if PSN was a good service with no issues, having to make a second account is enough of a reason to say no.
Pretty sure I had to sign in to 3 different services just to save in GTA4 back in the day.
Holy fuck what a dystopian nightmare.
I have medical conditions that cause sudden shifts in heart rate.
SNOY is going to ban other people because of my biometrics?!
This was actually the first thing that came to my head when reading about it, cause neither the patents, nor the article talk about any measures or contingencies for this exact issue.
Putting aside the virtual gestapo/thought crime enforcement thing, it's just too damn volatile from a technical standpoint. As you said, anyone with conditions like yours, or even someone with just high BP (which become a proxy to palpitation issues), or even worse, a straight-up heart attack midway through someone's gaming session, can essentially punish someone for doing nothing.
One more thing that isn't mentioned is friends. If someone is just having a healthy competition between friends, then what's exactly the contingency to that? Considering it's a machine process basically coded to act upon whatever minute thing it considers "offensive" to the player, then it will not consider factors like casual behaviour or healthy competition at all, their AI seems to be too binary to understand those nuances.
