Players' generated narratives = players reading of games?

Last month, City of Heroes (COH) introduced an authoring tool built-into its game called Mission Architect that allows players to create their own adventures, share them with other players in the game and have them rated. I would bet that the affordances would make the game more popular and extend its longevity. Tolino wouldn't classify these players' generated adventures as ludic artifacts because they remain within the confine of the game environment. But I would say that the opportunity to share one's own narratives in the form of game play and have it rated by others would stir up a lot of interest and encourage participation.

Well, I was right theoretically but in real practice, players abuse the opportunity to create short cut to level up the characters quickly. Micheal Abbot's posting, Rouge architect describes in greater detail of these abuses. I find this quote from him explains in a nutshell players' motivation to abuse the system (bold added):

While I'm sympathetic to the devs' desire to maintain a level playing field in their MMO, gaming the system and figuring out its loopholes is a game with a certain seductiveness all its own. Players are drawn to exploits like moths to flames.

I have been thinking about narrative and what players take from playing. I have a hypothesis that what players read from playing may have nothing to do with narrative their create. In the COH episode, I would to believe that players were likely to take away lesson on ingenuity in finding loopholes and capitalizing on the weakness of game design than reading into the lesson of good triumphing over evil (or vice versa) from the adventures they created. Well, I could be wrong? Hmm...I hope my research can shed light on this.