This annoys me so much.  I HATE when people tell me that, no, you can't enjoy this or that because it's not the way it's SUPPOSED to be.  Honestly, man, those aren't principles, they're just your opinions, and I really, really don't care if you think everyone is doing it wrong by liking what they like.  Holy cats, that bugs me.

Why does it bother people so much when someone else likes something different?  Why do they have to hop on their high-horse and preach about how what they like is the RIGHT way?  Why is it so bloody hard to accept that different people like different experiences?

If there are people out there who like cinematic games with very little gameplay then so be it.  If there are people out there who like games where you do nothing but jump over rabbits, one after the other, then so bloody be it.  If people want non-stop cut-scenes and QTE events then they every right to play those types of games.  It hurts me not at all.  Better that than a world where everything is a mindless platformer that you can play with most of your brain switched off.

Developers need to keep making the games they want to make and the games people want to play.  Those who don't like that need to deal with it.

the experience. its not about gameplay or story or what ever. every game sets out to be something different than the other.
for example, to the moon sets out to be a stroy driven game about the love between two people. does it have good graphics? no, its what 16 bit graphics. is the gameplay good ? well no, because there is little to no gameplay? but is the game amazing? yes, because it done what it set out to be.
if the experience is good, then thats what i care about. but if i feel that there is something lacking in the experience, whether its gameplay or story or graphics, then there is a problem

The thing is though, for me personally, I find myself being enamored often by the same things, even if the games were made for different purposes, those criteria usually stand out to make me feel "oh, I am in love with this game".

“Kindred spirits are not so scarce as I used to think. It's splendid to find out there are so many of them in the world.”
 ― from Anne of Green Gables

:O

I was thinking about this as I wrote my response! Long-time gamers like yourself are more likely to be sure of what they want in a game and can identify it. But I think that, just because of the breadth of experiences out there now, and the very few criteria we can apply to games to judge them (graphics sound gameplay etc) there are at least a couple of games out there that could challenge everyone's ideas of what they think they want in a game/makes a quality game. 

A good post, and true.  That's why I said there are so many variables.

Ico had average level gameplay, very little in the way of story, and characters I knew almost nothing about, yet it was probably the most captivating and compelling experience I've ever had in my gaming life.

There are lots of different right answers to this question.

Pokoko, about the more general principles DevilRising is referring to, I think that though it's true that some games attract the players they are made for, sometimes we'd ilke to look at principles that made games truly excellent, or classics.

For example, in movie-land, some movies are rated higher than others for certain reasons. Though it's true that everyone has different tastes, sometimes as videophiles we are curious to know what made X movie great, what are the principles that made them great, even considering variances of taste.

@Sal. Good food for thought. For example Shadow of the Colossus has no minions but it is one of my favorite games. That defies an expected design in a game yet the game still became a cult hit. Though I've never played Journey I would imagine there is something similar in that experience.

I think this type of games you are mentioning are the ones that fall into my "exceptions" category like 999. One aspect of the game (that's not gameplay for me) is so good that the other ones pretty much don't matter. Although so far there's only 1 game in my exceptions box. 

I heard a lot of people talking about To the Moon, I will play that game when I have the time.

i dont mean to sound like a condescending A-hole, but i feel that those who say that if a game doesnt have one aspect like gameplay or story or graphics as the good as the best game out there to be missing out on what gaming really is. a lot of games dont need to be fully focused on gameplay to be good. it needs to be desgined in a way that it makes the game immersive. an example is littlebigplanet. a lot of people dismiss it because "the gameplay isnt that good" yet its gameplay does what its supposed. the game is immersive and the gameplay is desgined in a way that creating levels is easy and fun to match the gameplay. and it isnt overly complicated. 

i treat every game like that. an example is Dead Island,  it isnt about the story, or the graphics, or the production value's. but fighting the zombie's and leveling up your weapons and such. im a guy who loves a strong and great story, dead island lacks that, but it didnt ruin the game for me, as it didnt set out to have that. can i call it an amazing game? no not really. but it was a fun one that i really enjoyed. and honestly there is nothing really wrong with that