But what it has is a completely trad feeling. You do the exact same things you would be doing in any trad game, with identical procedures. (...) I have the feeling that the enthusiasm with AW and DW is more related with the indie community giving themselves permission to like a trad game because it has been designed by the right person.
I think this is an over-simplification because there is a qualitative difference in how AW associates its mechanics. (I'm only casually familiar with DW, so my comments may or may not apply to it.)
In a traditional RPG, the associated mechanics generally model specific, concrete actions. If we think of that as "tactical decision making", then AW features strategic decision making. The distinction is subtle, but radical.
For example, in D&D you'd make the non-mechanical decision to "fuck this shit" and bug out, but you'd make a specific mechanical decision to use the mechanics for breaking down a door to escape. In AW, on the other hand, you make the
mechanical decision as a Gunlugger to "fuck this shit" and bug out, and then you'd make the non-mechanical decision that your strategic aim is accomplished by busting through the door.
The other major shift in AW is the idea of limiting the GM to a specific set of moves that they're allowed to perform. This not, IME, an actual constraint on the GM (because of how those moves are formulated). But it is a radically different way of looking at how the GM interacts with the game.
And I think this different POV (combined with how easy it is to hack the system) is why AW has attracted so much enthusiasm.
It's an RPG, not an STG. But it is also different from traditional RPGs in several key ways. Trying to gloss over those differences isn't useful or accurate.