Do you mean always, in all of his WoT writing, or just in this particular scene? Because "completely" is a pretty big word if I take you literally. I hadn't read the scene in question yet, but I will do so right now.

Let's see ... you said cues to character interaction were completely absent, including facial expressions, physical gestures, and tones of voice. So going through it quickly ...

- 'Gawyn cocked an eyebrow at his sister.' (facial expression indicating a questioning attitude)

- '“I’m waiting for a report,” Elayne said, gesturing for Egwene to join her in a pair of cushioned chairs beside the brazier.' (gesture indicating mutual respect)

- '“You need rest,” Gawyn said, folding his arms.' (gesture indicating sternness)

- 'Egwene rubbed her temples.' (gesture indicating tiredness and/or frustration)

- 'Elayne smiled fondly.' (facial expression indicating, uh, fondness)

- 'She rubbed the page with her thumb, as if lost in thought.' (gesture interpreted by Egwene to mean Elayne is lost in thought)

- '“He has a fair bit of gleeman in him,” Elayne said, again fondly.' (tone of voice indicating fondness)

- 'Birgitte already had the tent flaps open, hand on her sword.' (gesture indicating quick alertness)

Blah, blah, this scene goes on forever and I only care so much. But I think it's pretty clear that "completely" is an exaggeration on your part.

It definitely has a lot fewer descriptions and character observations than Jordan would have used, fewer by acres, and I tend to agree that Sanderson in this particular scene is being a little too sparse with the adjoining narration (which doesn't mean I agree that he's always too sparse with it). But I think you and DomA are still being far too critical based on your own reading preferences.

For example, narration is not the only way to "give us some cues about character interaction", as you put it. The dialogue itself does that as well. A few quick for instances from the first few paragraphs of the scene, along with my top-of-the-head reader interpretations that I get from the dialogue alone ...

- '“Are you going to stay in this time?” Egwene asked, dipping her pen, “or are you going to go right back out?”' (she's noticed that he's going in and out a lot and can't sit still, and she wants him to stay in but not enough to simply tell him so)

- '“I don’t like this night, Egwene.” He looked over his shoulder. “Something feels wrong about it.”' (clearly he's got his nerves up and is feeling some tension)

- '“The world holds its breath, Gawyn, waiting upon the events of the morrow. Did you send to Elayne, as I requested?”' (she thinks it's natural enough that the night feels wrong, and isn't particularly worried. She's still wondering if he can take orders)

- '“Yes. She won’t be awake. It’s too late for her.”' (he can take orders but he thinks he knows Elayne better than others do)

- '“We shall see.”' (she is confident that she does, but is together and in Amyrlin mode and isn't going to be a jerk about anything)

I got plenty out of those lines without the extra narration. Could it use a little more narration anyway? Yeah, I think it could. But it's not as though the stuff I interpreted from it is so crucial that the whole book falls apart if it's not spelled out for the readers.

I think you are exaggerating a little again. And as for the example you cite, as a reader I don't particularly care exactly how each character moves through each scene; as long as I know the setting and who's involved, I can work out as many or as few of the details as I want in my internal image of the scene. That's not to say you aren't right about the scene being poorly constructed—I don't have it immediately on hand to read it myself, so I can't say. You could be right. But exact detailed scene narration is not critical to me as a reader as long as I have enough to let my head join in the game.

I'm not about to compare Sanderson to Shakespeare, but are you able to enjoy reading Shakespeare plays? I like reading them and don't feel they suffer for lack of precise narration of movement, facial expression, gesture, etc. Obviously that's an extreme example, almost pure dialogue, and Shakespeare wrote out some of those things in the dialogue characters speak to react to certain events, but just as obviously Sanderson's story isn't pure dialogue. There is some narration there, even if it's not as much as you'd like.

Sanderson definitely could have (and perhaps in this case should have) added some additional POV-centric narration. It's especially strange that he hasn't when you consider that he does include more in his own books. But this is also only one scene and I'd have to look at a lot more to say if it's the same problem through all his WoT books.

That said, it really, really is a matter of preference to some degree. I enjoyed The Gathering Storm more than I enjoyed any of the previous several Jordan books, and I think I demonstrated above that I'm capable of picking cues out of the dialogue and the bare narration in that scene, even if personally I'd like a little more narration than that.

Given that Sanderson is himself a creative writing instructor and bestselling author on his own non-WoT merits, it's safe to say he knows what constitutes good creative writing, and I think I have some idea as well. Clearly this particular scene isn't Sanderson at the top of his game, and I don't really want to make excuses for him. However, you said that it wouldn't take much space to add in Jordan-style narration. Maybe it wouldn't take much space to do it for one paragraph, or a couple, but for every paragraph in the book? The book would double in size even if you were able to eliminate a few chapters by showing them from other POVs.

Personally I think there's something to be said for economy and leaving room for reader interaction and interpretation. Likewise I think there's something to be said (perhaps a lot to be said) for reading clues from the dialogue without over-narrating everything.

These books definitely aren't being done the way Jordan would have done them, but I feel both you and DomA are laying the hyperbole on far too thickly when it comes to the superior merits of certain styles and what you feel is the complete lack of those merits in Sanderson's WoT books.