The document discusses the debate between ludology and narratology in game studies. Ludology refers to studying games through their formal rules and systems, seeing narrative as extraneous. Notable ludologists included Aarseth, Frasca, and Eskelinen. Narratology examines games as a storytelling medium. This debate was exaggerated early on as the field was being defined. Both sides are now seen as reductive, and most agree games contain both ludic and narrative elements that should be studied cooperatively.

1. GAMES OR NARRATIVES?
LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY

2. LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY
LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY DEBATES
▸ Symptom of struggles to define the field of game studies
▸ What should be studied?
▸ Games and games? Or games as a new means for
storytelling?
▸ Debates are somewhat exaggerated—was a symptom of
early debates about how to define the field

3. LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY
WHAT IS LUDOLOGY? WHO WERE LUDOLOGISTS?
▸ Ludology refers to “the study of games”
▸ Term first used by game scholars in 1999 to refer to the discipline that
studies game and play activities. Ludologists were academics such as
Espen Aarseth, Gonzalo Frasca, Greg Costikyan, and Markku Eskelinen
▸ Storytelling and narrative were seen as extraneous; not essential to games
▸ Gaming situation is different than narrative situations. Ludology
suggested that “games cannot be understood through theories derived
from narrative”
▸ Formalist: focus on formal elements. Focus on rules, not fiction or
narrative

4. “LUCKILY, OUTSIDE THEORY, PEOPLE ARE USUALLY
EXCELLENT AT DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN NARRATIVE
SITUATIONS AND GAMING SITUATIONS: IF I THROW A BALL AT
YOU, I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO DROP IT AND WAIT UNTIL IT
STARTS TELLING STORIES.”
Markku Eskelinen. 2004
LUDOLOGISTS POKING FUN AT NARRATOLOGISTS

5. THE KEY ELEMENTS [OF VIDEO GAMES],
THE NARRATION AND THE GAMEPLAY,
[ARE] LIKE OIL AND WATER, [AND] ARE
NOT EASILY MIXED”
Espen Aarseth, 2004
LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY

6. LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY
CRITIQUE OF EARLY LUDOLOGISTS
▸ Seen by many as a reductive formalism. Janet Murray
describes ludologists as game essentialists
▸ Ludologists fall into the trap of abstract formalism. They
treat games as a special activity, with no relation to other
media forms
▸ Ludology becomes an form of “game essentialism”

7. “[LUDOLOGY] FUNCTIONS AS BOTH AN IDEOLOGY AND A
METHODOLOGY. THE IDEOLOGY CAN PERHAPS BE CALLED
GAME ESSENTIALISM (GE), SINCE IT CLAIMS THAT GAMES,
UNLIKE OTHER CULTURAL OBJECTS, SHOULD BE INTERPRETED
ONLY AS MEMBERS OF THEIR OWN CLASS, AND ONLY IN
TERMS OF THEIR DEFINING ABSTRACT FORMAL QUALITIES.
Janet Murray
LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY

8. “NO ONE GROUP CAN DEFINE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR
THE STUDY OF GAMES. GAME STUDIES, LIKE ANY
ORGANIZED PURSUIT OF KNOWLEDGE, IS NOT A ZERO-
SUM TEAM CONTEST, BUT A MULTI-DIMENSIONAL, OPEN-
ENDED PUZZLE THAT WE ALL ARE ENGAGED IN
COOPERATIVELY SOLVING.”
Janet Murray
LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY

9. LUDOLOGY VS. NARRATOLOGY
NARRATIVE AND NARRATOLOGISTS
▸ Scholars focused on games as a storytelling medium
▸ Focus on narrative dimensions
▸ Focus on representational, fictional elements of games
▸ Critique of narrative approach by ludologists/formalists:
▸ Fall victim to the ideology of story fetishism (i.e.,
everything is a story)