Unless the imagery gets much better, I'd find it quite ugly to drive in one of those when a real view outside would be available. It might be a lot better than low vis outside at night, but it sure falls short of the view you get with the Mark I Eyeball. And they mentioned the nausea you can get from these systems. Plus expanding your field of view could be useful, but your ability to take in everything in a view that is compressed (if you want all 360 degrees visible in front of you) could be questionable.
I suspect what you want in battle dress is visual light mode, various multi-spectral and multi-sensor modes, and the ability to have a quick look behind or to the flanks via a control toggle. I don't think you want to see everything happening around you at ever moment... it could be that you are point man and your team moving behind you could well distract you from what you need to be focused on.
The reconfigurable wheel/track system seemed interesting. Just don't tell Timothy we'd need to write up something to handle such a system in Traveller for the APCs (then the question of wheeled vs tracked goes away...). I also liked something they showed but didn't comment on - that system displayed an ability to wide out its wheel-to-wheel distance (the rear suspension moved the tires out maybe 12 or 15" per side). That could be a great stability advantage in some kinds of terrain.
The 'electric motor in the wheel' idea has some performance advantages but one unmentioned large disadvantage: Damage to a wheel is no longer just 'take the wheel off, put on the spare', it is 'dismount the motor and wheel and install a much heavier and more expensive part than a dumb wheel'.
I do like the long travel suspension system. It's not that I would want to drive along the side of a hill like that, but some ostensibly flat areas are just very rough (many deep potholes and minor chasms) and that system could navigate them. I like the way it helps isolate the occupants from bouncing all over.