Concrete versus Abstract

Philosophically, I find that there are many parallels between games and literature.  Some games are very explicit in their narrative (such as most role-playing games) while others are a bit more esoteric.  Chess, for example, has an implicit narrative, though it is not much explored in the scope of the game.  It is simply a given that kings war with one another, and the motivation therein is largely irrelevant.

The more abstract a game is, the more obscure the narrative... or the more non-fictional it becomes.  For example, poker seems to have no narrative at all, yet watching people play can be very engaging because the players themselves are the narrative.