He certainly didn't run out of money.
The thing I like about live-print, is that the person can verify with confidence their choice, as the names of persons for whom no vote was cast need not be printed. Also, with live print there's no question about how close a person's mark is to a check box. The reading machine always gets to read the predictably formatted print of the other machine. Any person at any polling place ought to work fine, and so could voting and printing at home and bringing in the printed ballot to be scanned and dropped off, almost as if vote-by-mail was used.
However, I don't expect this to be used. As you said, getting things right and extending the franchise isn't of interest. The voting fraud laws in WV are especially delightful, as they provide a penalty to the person who commits voting fraud, but require the fraudulent votes be kept and counted, so long as they are accompanied by even one properly recorded vote. This way, the "suicide bomber" approach to voting fraud is almost guaranteed to be successful.
Another thing I think would be a good idea is to use two machines, one for printing the piece of paper and another for scanning. It should be easy for the first machine to print a piece of paper that is readable both by the person and the second machine.