The sole purpose of a game is to create a medium through which players can interact.
The measure of a game lies in the interaction it fosters -- whether it encourages it, formalizes it to ritual, inspires new interaction, or constrains it into different shapes. A game that stifles interaction is boring and pointless. However, a game that allows otherwise strangers to interact on common ground is comforting; a game that pushes its players to interact on different levels is intense; a game that allows players to interact in ways that they've been unable to before is liberating.
This impacts every level of design and play, down to the technique and ephemera level. Mechanics that privilege one player to speak without interruption (and interaction) for extended periods of time may seem like a good idea, but in the end they actually detract from the game experience. This is true whether the mechanics privilege the GM or the player who just won a die roll. The point isn't to get your say; the point is to participate in a dialogue. There are other players at the table for a reason; the other players are the point.
The game is merely a medium created to allow the players to interact with each other. Everything else -- the "content," the "theme," the "mechanics" -- either forwards that goal or gets in the way. The essential core is people talking. The stuff that fosters that is good; the stuff that gets in the way needs to be ripped out.
I need to rewrite bits of FLFS.