jenkins' narrative architecture

Markku Eskelinen, an independent scholar and self-professed "ludologist", in his response to Jenkins' paper "Game Design as Narrative Architecture", says:

According to the well-known phrase of David Bordwell, narration is "the process whereby the film's sjuzet and style interact in the course of cueing and constraining the spectator's construction of the fabula." In games there are other kinds of dominant cues and constraints: rules, goals, the necessary manipulation of equipment, and the effect of possible other players for starters. This means that information is distributed differently (invested in formal rules, for example), it is to be obtained differently (by manipulating the equipment) and it is to be used differently (in moving towards the goal).
By systematically ignoring and downplaying the importance of these and other formal differences between games and narratives as well as the resulting cognitive differences, Jenkins runs the risk of reducing his comparative media studies into repetitive media studies: seeing, seeking, and finding stories, and nothing but stories, everywhere. Such pannarrativism could hardly serve any useful ludological or narratological purpose.

Do you agree with Eskelinen's dismissal of Jenkins' approach? Why/why not?

I feel that Eskelinen casts too huge a generalization about Jenkins’ article. In the article, Jenkins attempts to show the concurrence of game and narratives in response to the typical perception that the two are antitheses. He does so by emphasizing the similarities between the two, but simultaneously acknowledges their differences. In fact, he states that it is common knowledge that “not all games tell stories”, “playing games can never be simply reduced to the experience of a story” and games that tell stories are “unlikely to tell them in the same ways that other media tell stories”. He even gave examples like Pong or Pac-Man, which are games that are devoid of narrative elements. Evidently, Jenkins is not “ignoring and downplaying the importance” of the differences between games and narratives as Eskelinen claims.

Jenkins approached the argument that narratives and games are not immiscible from the narrative perspective. He gave the model of narratives a larger scope, from one that extends beyond the conventions of classical linear narratives to one that allows spatial exploration and transmedia storytelling. He then classifies games according to their narrative architectures: spatial stories and environmental storytelling, evocative spaces, enacting stories, embedded narratives and emergent narratives. Eskelinen’s concern an overemphasis in merging games and narratives may have arose from this. However, Jenkins did not simply reduce games into narratives but to show the emergence of narrative ambitions in many games. For instance, Super Mario Bros. is a game with spatial storytelling and terming it as a “scroll game” aptly reveals its similarity to linear storytelling in Japanese scroll paintings. The narrative hook in the game (to rescue the princess) being found as the game’s goal or motivation shows that narratives complement and give meaning to gameplay.

Another valuable and interesting idea which Jenkins addresses is transmedia storytelling, by which the spectator’s fabula (story) is constructed via multiple media such as books, film, comics and games. This suggests that narratives need not be whole or complete in any particular medium as the spectator, reader or player can seek other channels to complete the narrative in the way he desires. Thus, the common worry of the inability of some games to depict whole narratives is dispelled.

I realize that today’s games are increasingly becoming inseparable from narratives but not narratives from games. Numerous games have spun from epic movies like Lord of the Rings, and these games need the narrative element to make the game experience more enriching. Conversely, narratives can exist in their individual forms like in any classic novel or script. Thus, it is essentially the narratives that motivate some games. The immense importance of narratives may hence be the reason for Jenkins’ great interest in narratives.

The value of Jenkins’ work lies in redesigning the model of narratives and exploring games with narrative elements through narrative architectures. His focus also drew much attention to narrative qualities in games. Such effort should not be easily belittled. Jenkins could, however, also address the issues of the gaming experience rather than discussing only the narrative aspect. He could have discussed on how the gaming experience is enhanced with the different narrative architectures, in addition to his focus on how games can convey different degrees of narrative satisfaction.