[L/G]Using Pyschoanalysis in your games. - Page 8

On July 03 2011 13:18 guapogato wrote:
(Hello, I am joe. This is my first post, and I only post because I am currently in training to be a psychoanalyst, and because i am diamond in everything).

I am so glad that another member of this exceptional community has observed the pronounced affect that the psyche can have upon play at any given moment. Of course, we all know this: MC, dictated by his charismatic bravado, destroying because of his attitutude; Idra, refusing to be dismissed, because he thinks he is the best; Happy, dominating in silence better than anyone.

Yet this discussion is always already flawed by its lack of discussion about what the self actually is when it plays the game: isn't this really the question?

As of thus far, this dicussion has focused on what a player says before the game; and this is less that worthy of discussion, imho. The idea is phenomonal though--how can i think better to play better???

I think that the answer lie in the typical lacanian response (french psychoanalytic philosopher, pay no mind if you don't know him, he was a baller), which is to say, that it is less that I play the game, then that the game plays me, at least when I am doing well.

There is a theory in contemporary american psychoanalytic theory called flow, and i think that the SC player, when playing well, perfectly emulates the ideal: focused; concentrated; loss of time consciousness; focused on a singular goal.

THe best question, then, is how can I enter this state???

Psychoanalysis is about desire; but I have already misspoken: psychoanalysis is about why we desire what we desire, and how. Why does psy consistently play 15 hatch when he knows of the high probability of a 2 rax all in? Why does Idra demand perfection, refuse to win without it; why does he believe the win to be worth more than it actually is? Whats up with Julyzerg, so quiet and underspoken, and simultaneously so aggressive, demanding that the Other react to his play?

I say Other, rather than other, because this other, the one we play upon the latter, is not a simple person we would know from our normal existence; no, we know that he will behave in such and such a way because of the meta-game: litteraly, the 'I' that is reflected in the system.

Thus, I believe that the best way to capture the energy engulfed within the desire to dominate is paradoxically distancing oneself from that desire: engaging desire merely makes you repeat the meta; this is is easily counterable; the best, the best, the best, do not play like everyone else, but like themselves.

There are a variety of tenable strategies in a game with the complexity of SCII; thus, the best question must be: where am I, how do I play, and why is the way I play better?

What the Other says at the begining of the game is a guessing game, but I do admire your bravado. Psychoanalysis is useful in this setting, but not to the extent that you can statistically verify a persons tendancies based upon their begining of the game comments. E.g. (no pun), I frequently open games saying: "Isn't Shakira fine? I'd love to waka her waka."

This is a good tactic if it works, because no one would have a ready answer, and hence would be distracted from the required singular desire of the SCII player, the desire to fucking kill.

On July 13 2011 11:46 drryworrx wrote:
You all think I am silly and stupid, but hey day9 confirmed what I talked about.

http://blip.tv/day9tv/day-9-daily-322-funday-monday-not-a-pylon-in-sight-5367213