"The best game is that which governs the player's actions least..."
Or something like that.
But, seriously, I have to disagree with this article. While I won't speak to the quality of the experience had from going through "The Last Express" (as I have not heard of it till now) I'm very much at the opposite position of what makes a "good game".
A game needs a few important qualities to be deemed as such: challenge, rules, goals, and interaction. If a "game" is lacking in these qualities then it ceases to be a game and becomes something else. An interactive movie is a great idea, and it may lead to a deep emotional experience, but it's not a game; it's one step away from popping in a DVD and "interacting" by watching the scenes in order as chosen by the audience.
Games need to be played. Without interaction there is no player--only an audience member.
Tetris may have zero character development (what characters?) and zero plot development (what plot?) but it contains the core necessities that a game must possess. In this way, "greatness" (substitute Pac-Man, Pong, etc. if you don't think Tetris is worthy of the tag "great") can be had without any emotional direction from the developers. The converse situation, emotional experiences lacking in the fundamental necessities, cannot yield great games--no matter how rich the characters seem.
Interactive movies are too much on the fringe. They may be great experiences, but, as per my view on the medium, they cannot be great games since they are not games.
Even so, I'd love to download The Last Express to find out what it's all about, since I've little doubt that it's magnificent after reading everyone's thoughts about it.