It is rare to find code that comprehensively explains (without comments) why it exists, or often more importantly, why some superficially-equivalent code doesn’t exist there.
So are politicians when not lying and well-behaved children.
Correctly done comments are a one in a million thing. In my experience, they are utterly surpassed by "i = i + 1; // increment i" style comments. (Seriously, I'm working on code written by someone who teaches programming and he writes this type of comment.)
Some languages like golang, doesn't priorities concise code, it often takes a few lines to do something trivial. Find the object in a list with the lowest lexicographical ranked value of some property.
The code to do this is simple, but not concise, leaving a comment so I can scan the function and skip 5-10 lines doing something trivial is nice.
This sounds like a self-fulfilling prophesy. If only think comments are for telling you what a line of code does literally, then you're only going to see comments where the code is obscure. If you use it as a form of high-level communication to help the user understand the broader context and reasoning behind code (like at the top of the linked page), then it will be useful because the person writing the comments understands why documenting your code is a good thing.
Code can and should be a form of high-level communication too. In a well-structured program, the high-level code will explain the high-level context, and the low-level detailed code will explain the low-level details.
Comments when done correctly are vital.