I read the article again and saw that the author already used differences like role-playing, simulation, story-telling. So far, my approach is not as different to his approach as I thought.

but, my interest of making games is different:

He uses the difference of substance and style to achieve a high quality of gameplay and success on the market. He talks about entertainment as the target of game development.

My interest is focused on how to get intense game experiences which are comparable in quality to the best novels and movies.
And the best novels and movies IMO make you think about your own life and its composition of decisions.
How does one achieve a gameplay which provides compositions of decisions or compositions of constraints of decisions which are comparable to real-life?


My thoughts aim at something like this:

If Shakespeare were living today and were making games, how would the games' gameplay 'look' like?
Or the other way round: How must a game be to have the value of a theatre play of Shakespeare?