Definitely not subjective! That's the point of reading faces.
And people don't know and can't articulate to feed back (even well educated, articulated people even they don't know the context of info they need to provide). I just experienced that beta testing. My users told me what they were experiencing, that controls stopped working and became unresponsive. They provided the info from their experience, and I couldn't work out what was happening. I then watched a boy play and he was having issues, and he was holding the phone at the centre rather than the top, where the controls only work in the top half. All the subjective feedback and speculation and users trying to understand and explain what's happening, they wouldn't think to say, "I'm holding the phone in this position," and I wouldn't think to ask. One minute's objective observation of a user and correlating exactly what they are doing with what's happening provides a lot more usable data. That's why we now have crazy amounts of metrics. Games can track and feedback exactly what players are doing, where they get turned off, etc. Feedback like, "I can't complete this part of the game and it's gone from challenging to frustrating," which you don't get in a review (this game sucks!) is better conveyed by looking at the stats that all players go this route, encounter those enemies, and fail, with 30% giving up after the 4th try and 75% giving up after the 10th.
Googlage of eye-tracking in game design...
[URL='https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5Hp0AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA293&lpg=PA293&dq=using+eye+tracking+for+better+game+design&source=bl&ots=2Yh4Z9Y8uT&sig=gHuITTUSLE-I-jZLa3CLoMPrVE0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiH1ujlvdPUAhUqKMAKHSEVAK4Q6AEIQjAE#v=onepage&q=using%20eye%20tracking%20for%20better%20game%20design&f=false']Two relevant quotes on eye tracking in game design including one from Ubisoft
Apparatus for improving game design[/URL]
The video never explained what 'an identity' is.
Deconstructing the video, it opens taking about games as something that moves people and makes them feel. At 1:04 we're told,
"We at SEGA created out new identity by observing the reactions of our users."
Identity isn't capitalised or marked out, so literally they should be talking about who SEGA are or how they are making themselves appear. Up to 1:05, it's all about, "we make games that feel and have crafted ourselves (our identity, id, purpose) by observing our users to ensure they feel."
The next half looks at how they read people to know that they are feeling. Body language, and the eyes. Dramatic pause and strange noise, which I now guess is the sound profile created from the eye tracking.
At 1:35 we see a test situation. Boy at console (PlayStation) and two technicians tracking their responses. "We tracked body language and turned that into a sound and graphic." This is shown on screen and played (that high-pitched noise again). Point to eye graphic on screen, which is probably just dramatic effect. I doubt there's any particular element there that shouts out something.
1:44, "world's first 'identity' was born." All they've talked about is tracking the eyes and turning that into a profile with a graphic and sound that summarises the user's response. Ergo that's what an 'identity' is - a user response profile encoded a couple of ways.
End.
The only thing that makes it something beyond a PR fluff piece about using eye tracking for game design (cf. Ubisoft above) is the title - Future of SEGA teaser. That's where the imagination can run riot. The actual content is IMO coherent and limited. Potentially they could have an eye-tracking peripheral in a game. It's existed as an option for a few years. It'll likely bomb if so because people don't want to put on geeky glasses to play games.
