Ok the number one problem is nobody knows what is it that makes a game what it is.
There is barely any theory on game narrative or interactive studies of gaming and audiences. Most research involves violent game studies which is the most limiting scope you could ever have. It's not like TV theory hasn't evolved either, just takes time.
So yes he's right but no, its way too early to box it in. I love films and i love narratives in video games but they are a pale imitation of cinema unfortunately and certainly conflict with the player's expectations and intentions.
( side note - why do you turn in to the chicken in TP, are we being punished for our past life chicken killing behaviour. Is Miyamoto punishing or rewarding our unique attempt at rewriting the story)
More Research needed
“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.
