This is an extremely well-written article with a clear structure and
excellent use of numerous examples, together with a thorough discussion of
their relevance. My one major niggle was at the very start: the stated
triangular relationship between Landscape, Character and Action. I'd have
personally viewed the relevant triangle more as Landscape, Character and
Plot, with Action being the interaction between each of these pairs, and
specifically:
<P>
 character & plot - what the player wants to do
 character & landscape - what the player does
 plot & landscape - what the player can do
<P>
Raising plot to be more fundamental also addresses a related problem for me
at the start of para 2 : "In this formulation, the only one of the
triumvirate completely under the game's control is Landscape. Action is
entirely in the hands of the player, and Character lies halfway between the
two." But here I'd argue that Plot is the other big thing under the
author's control, and Landscape can only absorb Plot if it means
non-physical landscape too ...
<P>
So I had a big problem with the initial premise! However I agreed with the
importance of landscape and character, and their relationship, so could
happily read the rest of the article.
<P>
The only other criticism I'd make is that the "Nothing More, Nothing Less"
bathroom example is probably too long and certainly seemed that way as I
read it. Despite not having played the game I anticipated what was coming
in the example later on, so got a bit bored: a good sign that the example
needs shortening. Perhaps drop one of the later game quotes, or shorten the
paragraph before the last quote. It's a very relevant example but doesn't
benefit from being worked through in quite such length.