Well, looks like the article stirred up a shitstorm 
So, to clear things up.
1. I originally described Timothy Zahn as the best Star Wars writer. I know that his stuff is low-brow pulp, but I also think that he's the best Star Wars novelist (before the EU books went to la-la land with the Yuuzhan Vong silliness). The "universally loved" bit came from the editor. The idea was to find a place where books and video games can be compared directly, and see what could be gleaned from the comparison. And, I actually think that Zahn's "tie fighers pulled up like an exotic fountain" bit was actually a well-written and economical use of language. They're both seemingly disparate objects (fountain, tie fighter) which hold a common property (movement). My problem is with writers who think they can set a mood just by using the word "red" over and over again, or those who spend paragraphs describing setting with no regard to flow.
2. This article is more an attack on fiction than anything, although with the way it's worded, and the size constraints, movies could be used interchangeably with video games (adding movies to the mix would make for a whole 'nother topic).
3. I came to this article mostly after frustration with critically acclaimed novels which are touted as having "vivid imagery" and possessing "lyrical language." They weren't any fun to read, and I'll wager that much of the acclaim comes from the aura of impenetrability, religious mystical posturing, which at the core holds nothing. There is a good reason why fiction is in decline.
4. Yes, I like video games more than fiction. They're more visceral, they're works of art to behold, they're fun. In the end, it's all entertainment, a way to pass time, and perhaps impart a lesson. The article tries to get to why that is.
So, to clear things up.
1. I originally described Timothy Zahn as the best Star Wars writer. I know that his stuff is low-brow pulp, but I also think that he's the best Star Wars novelist (before the EU books went to la-la land with the Yuuzhan Vong silliness). The "universally loved" bit came from the editor. The idea was to find a place where books and video games can be compared directly, and see what could be gleaned from the comparison. And, I actually think that Zahn's "tie fighers pulled up like an exotic fountain" bit was actually a well-written and economical use of language. They're both seemingly disparate objects (fountain, tie fighter) which hold a common property (movement). My problem is with writers who think they can set a mood just by using the word "red" over and over again, or those who spend paragraphs describing setting with no regard to flow.
2. This article is more an attack on fiction than anything, although with the way it's worded, and the size constraints, movies could be used interchangeably with video games (adding movies to the mix would make for a whole 'nother topic).
3. I came to this article mostly after frustration with critically acclaimed novels which are touted as having "vivid imagery" and possessing "lyrical language." They weren't any fun to read, and I'll wager that much of the acclaim comes from the aura of impenetrability, religious mystical posturing, which at the core holds nothing. There is a good reason why fiction is in decline.
4. Yes, I like video games more than fiction. They're more visceral, they're works of art to behold, they're fun. In the end, it's all entertainment, a way to pass time, and perhaps impart a lesson. The article tries to get to why that is.