I like this as a game design 101 and I like that Sony is somehow supporting small educational games like this, but I don't agree with the conclusions.
I don't think SotC is that good for the same reasons the narrator complains about explicit systems: there's only a single solution available to the player in order to progress. The final boss (and SotC) don't allow much player expression: the only way to win is to stand in a certain spot, shoot specific spots in a specific order, jump at a specific time, and use the grapple in a specific place. I don't really care whether I hit the jump button or interact button to climb when there's only a single spot where it will actually succeed.
I think Dishonored, Hitman, or any other immersive sim are better examples of fully interactive systems. Those games are all about giving you a sizeable toolkit and then the player discovering and exploiting the reactions caused by your actions on the game and allow a large degree of player freedom in how you progress through the game.
I don't think SotC is that good for the same reasons the narrator complains about explicit systems: there's only a single solution available to the player in order to progress. The final boss (and SotC) don't allow much player expression: the only way to win is to stand in a certain spot, shoot specific spots in a specific order, jump at a specific time, and use the grapple in a specific place. I don't really care whether I hit the jump button or interact button to climb when there's only a single spot where it will actually succeed.
I think Dishonored, Hitman, or any other immersive sim are better examples of fully interactive systems. Those games are all about giving you a sizeable toolkit and then the player discovering and exploiting the reactions caused by your actions on the game and allow a large degree of player freedom in how you progress through the game.