There's a very obvious analogy here that proves you wrong: nvgs
Another example is red dot / holographic gun sights.
As an aside, while I agree with you broadly on NVGs, my experience with PVS-7's is that they're basically not much better than naked eyesight (I hope the more modern NVGs are better). The thing that makes NVGs really good is either IR lights or IR lasers.
And yes, modern NVGs are a whole different world from PVS-7s.
The potential for passive blue force tracking alone seems pretty awesome to me (but you'd certainly know better)
Then if it somehow falls through the cracks, it's on the commanders shoulders to pay for that piece of high-speed unused tech that the lobbyist swore would revolutionize the battle-space.
It might speak to there being some problems with state-side testing of devices for appropriateness on the battlefield but a 20% success rate of cutting edge equipment seems pretty good. Infantry folk are probably going to use the useful bits and pack away the useless ones - that feedback will eventually trickle back to fulfillment and the kit will be updated.
Also - I have a lot of faith in infantrymen finding really creative uses for tech that folks in the lab might disregard.
Companies like Mojo Vision have already built a contact lens prototype that could power “superhuman” traits like this.