It's interesting that most fictional depictions of legged robots (outside of explicitly humanoid robots) use digitigrade legs. Did the artists model their art after animals which happened to have these legs, or did they subconsciously realize that this would be more effective?
Isn't it obvious? After you see an ostrich running, there is little doubt about its efficiency.
Now, actually capturing that efficiency in a real system takes some really hard engineering work. Fictional robots do not need to conserve energy, compensate for impacts, etc.
Another thing that we are going to see in combat vehicles in the next decades, IMHO, is something like OmniMechs. Meaning that future weapon systems, e.g. fighters or tanks (not the upcoming generation but those after that, F-35's successor' successors) will feature LRUs (line-replaceable units) that carry different mission capabilities. That way, a fighter can land as a ground support fighter or drone controller and lift of as air superiority fighter by swapping a hand full of modules out.
It certainly sounds terrifying having an adversary that can pivot into superiority based on the situation, but I wonder how practical it would be when faced with an opponent who simply brought the right amount of non-modular vehicles in the first place?
If you have to pivot to gain air superiority, there's a really good chance that you've already lost.
I feel like in theory you’d be able to adjust the mix across the battlefield throughout the battle and it would be less about one plane’s ability to pivot.
Like bazookas took care of Panzer IVs? I like how everyone just heard about Javelins and now thinks they rendered all armored vehicles obsolete over night.
EDIT: You now what takes care of a Javelin, or rather the guy using it? A bat or a knife.
From everything we’ve seen in warfare over the last few decades javelins and other shoulder mounted anti-tank weapons do render heavy armor highly vulnerable. New armor solutions that are even more expensive than existing ones but no more resilient against these weapons is throwing money down the drain. Sorry it fractures cherished anime fantasies.
And there I was convinced the best anti-tank weapon was a sharp Katana... Combined arms are a thing, and tanks were never well suited for urban environments. And vulnerable is the opposite of obsolete, everything and everyone is vulnerable on a battlefield.
The race between armor and anti-armor is as old as armor, it is what gave us Javelins in the first place. I don't see any reason why that is going end, ever.
Which is why nobody is going to produce something that is shiny and impressive but offers no added strategic advantage against existing counter-measures in this old struggle.
France/Germany, the US, South Korea / Turkey are launching new MBT programs at the moment, whether or not you believe the entry into service dates of 2035 for the Franco-German or US programs or not.
Not to forget that the existing models are constantly being upgraded.
That being said, shiny and impressive is usually enough to get expensive and job creating military programs of the ground, isn't it?
Edit: AT-ST Walker, too.