Rather than people (like the RPG Pundit or, for that matter yourself) who use it to define games they don't like.
That is what the term was created to cover. It has drifted since then. The only practical definition of a Storygame I'm aware of is "A game produced by those people over there."
Ok, we're pretty much done then.
I quite happen to like Story Games. I think they are great. I think it is wonderful innovation in the art and scope of gaming. My hat's off to those that developed them. I had thought we were trying to learn something about the design of games, and hone our language so that we could speak more clearly and more correctly than someone like Wick who is busy spouting nonsense like, "D&D is not an RPG". But apparently that's not your motivation. Your motivations is that you like the gobbledly-gook. You are trying to argue for useless and flimsy definitions because for some reason you think that not being able to speak about something with precision protects your thing from criticism, and you are so focused on that that you are completely unable to imagine that anyone else in the discussion doesn't have the same motivation.
Your fundamental assertion is that 'story game' has no meaning. That's its just a veiled insult. As such, you can't allow it to have meaning (because then the insult, as you perceive, might be pointed). Personally, I don't like terms that have no meaning. Words that have no meaning need to be tossed out, which is apparently your real desire, so what's the point of discussing this with you?
But somewhere along the line I find it really bizarre that Hillfolk - a game that uses the Drama Engine - is somehow definitively an RPG whereas MonsterHearts - which uses the Apocalypse World Engine - is somehow definitively a Story Game. I'm not a strict believer in 'System Matters' but neither is system wholly unimportant. The Apocalyse World Engine and the Drama Engine have very different traits and play out very differently in game. These systems are so different that to me it seems obvious that they belong to different catagories of games. Not as you would have it superior and inferior categories, not as something were we need to pretend the differences don't exist so that people don't get their feelings hurt, but as different sorts of games that might be equally enjoyable to some or not so appealing to others and all that be ok.
As for Hillfolk being "pretty obviously a storygame", not a bit of it. Until you called it one I hadn't seen anyone call it one. Hillfolk is certainly a Dramasystem. But where is the actual Story part of Hillfolk?
You are arguing that Drama System and Hillfolk is not only not designed to put story first, but doesn't produce one? Seriously?
Congratulations. You've just claimed that
Monsterhearts, which claims on the cover, to be a Storygame (and is so far as I am aware universally accepted by those who use the term for things they actually play) isn't one. Disproof by counterexample.
John Wick asserts D&D isn't an RPG. Does that prove it isn't? Some people on this board are asserting that everything that isn't OD&D is not a true RPG. People can assert whatever they like. Absent actual definitions - particularly in the presence of definitions that seem as yours do to just indicate which team you belong to - people are liable to assert all sorts of erroneous things. At which point, this is nothing more than an alignment debate with someone that doesn't believe good and evil have definitions, so what's the point of labels beside identifying the colors of the hats. And so now I finally see why everyone is talking past each other.
And there goes the entire PBTA family. Although most of them, to be fair, aren't Storygames.
Agreed. Actually, none of them are story games.
As is the boardgame Descent?
I've never played it, but as far as I can tell, yes, yes it is. The fact that D&D is sometimes played as a grand version of something like the boardgame Descent is precisely the sort of thing that provoked Wicks rant about how D&D is not in its essence an RPG. Wick is like, "Everyone that isn't using low drama method acting at the table is not playing an RPG." and "If it has a weapons table, its' not an RPG because RPGs are about story." All of which struck me as silly except that I think the problem is that Wick's vocabulary is starved. Wick needs to say, "I prefer games that focus on story over process simulation to the extent that they totally deprecate purist for process simulation and don't feature it at all. Hense, I like Story Games more than RPGs." Wonderful. Let's discuss the features of story games and how to make them great play experiences. I'd love to add more types of games to my already broad gaming vocabulary.
Alternatively: Thou shall not be the best at everything. There's nothing wrong with assuming high baseline competence.
Like the laws of Thermodynamics, there are a lot of ways to phrase the concept.