Good article and I agree with his examples. Valve have always been good at using actual game mechanices and total immersion to tell a story without suddenly making you watch a movie.
On consoles the best story games I've played are ICO and SOTC - which have minimal, well done cutscenes then use very similar techniques to Valve to let you experience the story as you play, and gain a sense of mood and purpose as you do so.
Silent Hill games are also pretty good at this, especially 2 & 4 (yes 4 was a bit of a let down as a silent hill game, but its story and method where as good as 2 IMO).
I also agree with others that this defines a difference between many games/successes on each console at the moment.
I know there's Zelda on Wii (but I won't annoy the masses with why I don't see Zelda as any pinacle of story telling) but for the most part the big Wii games = fun, pure videogames with no real story baggage (see Zero Punctuation for best description of the non-story in SMG for reference).
Ps3/360 on the other hand have been gravitating to story centric shooters, action titles (most of which fall foul of the flaws indicated in the article).
Still, I play my PS3 more than my Wii because right now, flawed or not, I actually prefer a game trying to tell a story to a pure videogame (unless I'm playing Wii with my kids) and am curious to see how videogames evolve in this regard. I wonder whether we'll get games that are more story/experience than game in the process... perhaps we'll need a new identifier than videogame for those in the end.
That's why I want to know what the hell Team ICO is working on! And why I have low hopes for the new Silent Hill as I'm sure that having an American developer is going to ruin it (as with the US movie remakes of Asian horror films I think they will only be able to replicate the feel of silent hill but not be able to add anything nor make it feel anything other than a copy).
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
