Ink to Blog

Devices want to be used

2026-08-05T00:00:00Z

Buying new devices for a hobby or entertainment purposes is exciting. I enjoy researching, watching reviews, and digging into forums to determine if my purchase will be worth it. I imagine myself using my new toy. Often, this thought makes me happier than the actual experience of using it. In the past, I purchased musical instruments, consoles, handhelds, e-readers, and other electronic devices that way.

The excitement wears off, the new thing becomes the familiar thing and the days when the device collects dust in the corner grow more numerous. I feel bad for not using it, because I made myself a promise. The moment I bought it, I promised myself that I would be using it - not explicitly, but through the act of buying alone. If I use it and the thing can fulfill its purpose, I also fulfill that promise. Not using it means that I don't actually need it. I don't want to admit that, of course, because my money has already been spent. This creates emotional resistance to the idea of letting go, so it still allocates space at the back of my mind.

Every purchased device brings with it a form of liability. You should engage with it because it is simply there. It turns from something that should bring you joy to an object that demands an action from you. It broadens your pastime options, but now it's harder to choose, because more options are present, and every option we pick disregards the other ones. Our entertainment purchases should serve and not burden us. We should be careful about which devices we allow to demand our consideration. Every new toy binds our future attention to it, even if we are not using it.

Games are not taken seriously as an art form

2026-07-28T00:00:00Z

I remember when Hollow Knight: Silksong came out and people playing the game demanded an easier and less punishing experience. Soon articles came in questioning the decisions Team Cherry made while developing the game. Terms like "Artificial Difficulty" were thrown around, players venting online that the game was too hard, unfair and inaccessible.

Some parts of that discussion show me that games are still not taken too seriously as an art form. The defining property of a video game is interactivity. The player makes an input and the game will react. This is what video games are good at and what differentiates them from other forms of media. What people often forget is that interactivity can also be a distinct artistic medium in its own right. The interaction between player and game does not only deliver art on the screen and to the ears, it alone is a vehicle of artistic intent. It can make you feel many things only through input and its consequences; it can make you feel like you are in control, helpless, frustrated, triumphant or satisfied.

To summarize: games want to evoke an emotion inside of you. And the relationship between the input the player has to execute and the reaction the game has based on that input plays an important role in achieving this goal.

Difficulty options

Difficulty options are a great tool for tweaking this relationship. Every difficulty option can change the emotion that is evoked inside the player while playing. A developer can add 10 difficulty options and change that aspect to accommodate every player's preferences. Now it's up to the player to choose what experience they want to have. It's like releasing a movie where viewers can adjust different sliders at the start. Based on that, specific scenes will get cut out, added, or changed. But does the artistic intent of the creator get delivered through these options? If they wanted you to feel helpless because you play inside a harsh and unforgiving world, easier options would dampen this intended experience. If they wanted you to have a chill ride, harder options would stand in contrast to the lighthearted world they have designed.

If the designers have a specific relationship between the game and the player in mind, why don't we let them design the game accordingly without demanding options to bend the difficulty to our liking? And yes, who says the intent of the designers does actually come through while playing the game? From my viewpoint, this question is not important, because we can not ever guarantee that, regardless of the art form. But it still plays a role in creating art that has soul.

Different skill levels

The problem with providing a hard game is that players have different skill levels. A very skilled player will not have the same experience as a less skilled player, because they won't struggle as much. He will still have to concentrate, but he will not fail as often. A less skilled player will not feel in control, because mechanically, he isn't.

But in both cases, players will still feel that the game is supposed to be hard, regardless of their skill level, and this will present the game world or setting in a specific way, which is in line with the intent of the designers.

Excluding players

Making a game too hard will exclude players. They will not be able to see the end of a game through their efforts. But is this really a bad thing? Every art form has specific requirements to enjoy it fully. Some people are not able to watch slasher movies. Some people find it very unpleasant to listen to specific music genres. There is also literature that is hard to read and understand. I can see the point that with these examples, people are still able to consume the art, even if they don't enjoy or get it. Games can present a hard line that some players are not able to cross, because from their view, skill is a prerequisite to see the "complete art piece".

But let's look at this from another angle. What if this unbreakable wall that some people can't tear down is what "not getting it" means in the context of video games? The same way you don't get a book because you lack training you also don't get the full game because you lack the skill or determination. We see a game as a complete art piece only when we have seen and experienced most of what it has to offer. The interactivity stands in the way of experiencing the "actual" art of the game. But it can be argued that not being able to finish a game is part of the experience and that it is a unique characteristic of consuming the art form of video games. I know for some, this may seem far-fetched, but it shows that we don't view the interactivity as an inseparable part of the game the same way we do for the graphics or the music. For many players, it is seen as a hurdle to experience the other parts.

Not the same weighting

My point is that many players don't consider interactivity equally important to the other elements of a video game when judging a game's artistic merit. We see it as something that should be variable and tuned to fit the player. This is in large part because we are used to tuning it, since game designers often present us with difficulty options. But should we have the right to demand adjustments to our preferences if we want to take games more seriously as a work of art? If we value full creative freedom for artists, should they still have to consider the wishes or tastes of the audience?

Punishing those who wrong me

2026-07-19T00:00:00Z

I tend to punish other people in a very specific way. If they do me wrong, I want to let them know. I want them to owe me one, even if it doesn't make the situation better. It is purely because it puts me in a position of power. Now they have to redeem themselves; they have to gain my favor again. And I can decide when the threshold has been reached and everything is good again. It can even happen that I want to make it more uncomfortable for them by just being silent or ambiguous about what exactly hurt me or what would have to be done to make things right.

This is not a good way of dealing with wrongdoings. Even if something really hurt me, it should be enough to just state it, and not try to increase the suffering of the other person. If they are a good person, they would want to learn from their mistakes without someone rubbing it in their face. If they aren't a good person, then I cannot expect redemption, or preferably, that they try to be better. But this is also where I am not sure, because when an individual fails to recognize their wrongdoing, it can help to show them how much their behavior hurt others. They have to feel pain themselves to have a motivation to change.

I am not being hurt often by my friends, because they are in fact good people, which makes it worse that I want to take advantage of the situation and see them in a vulnerable state. If they are in the wrong, they will come to that realization themselves, like they already did in the past. There is no reason to play the role of a victim.

Becoming a blueprint

2026-07-12T00:00:00Z

As a teenager, I searched for an identity and found it with music, inside gaming subcultures and the things I consumed. I could assign a role to myself and people would recognize me as someone from that group. It defined me through my clothing, the things I talked about and my social media presence. It was an easy way to find a place in the world at a time when my self-identity was not yet carved in stone, and still forming.

As adults, we still carry such labels with us. It is cognitively easier to assign someone a role with all the attributes that come with it according to our definition of that role. We have an easier time making sense of a person when they fit into a well-defined category, even if in reality they do not possess many of these attributes.

Merging with a role

I want to live up to a certain role. But only if I think that the role carries positive or neutral annotations with it. It is still something that shapes my identity, but unlike when I was younger, I am not able to shift in and out of roles that easily. There is less experimentation to determine which role is fitting or what role I want to be in. And once someone has assigned such a role to me, it is much harder to convince the person otherwise.

To not shatter the conception of a role the other person has in their mind, we tend to merge into that role to do it justice. Challenging that role means introducing friction in a social setting. Because it is part of our identity, we want the other person to see us as a part of that group. We confirm the label again and again, and because we want to be a good representative of the group, we also attain traits that we normally wouldn't. The danger lies in becoming more of a blueprint of a member of a group, rather than an individual.

"A person from that group would do X. So I should do X."

We can only break out of this pattern if we don't shape our identity around being part of a group, and instead try to stand on our own. Even if we strip all our hobbies and group memberships away, there should still be a person who is sure of who they are.

Why we trade time instead of outcomes

2026-06-30T00:00:00Z

In my employment contract there is no mention of productivity or an expected outcome. The one thing that is stated: I give time, I receive money, which means I trade time for money. Wouldn't it make more sense to demand something that is more valuable to my company than time? Time alone does not help them in any way. They want results, not time. I could spend all the time in the world sitting at my desk and would not produce anything useful for them. Time is valuable to me, but that does not make the time I devote to my job valuable to my company. If they want outcomes, why don't they call for them?

The answer is easy. Time is the easiest thing to measure. Productivity is hard to measure, because to measure it accurately, you need well-defined goals. And expected outcomes (goals) can change from week to week in many workplaces. Expected outcomes can be defined at the beginning with the information present at that time, but they won't stay relevant for long. They have to be reevaluated constantly, on top of being harder to pin down. Anything that changes is hard to put into a contract, because my contract has to be a static document that both sides can rely on.

Time is equal for everyone. Forty hours are forty hours. This time is the same for me as it is for my boss. It doesn't have to be reevaluated; automatic systems can track it. Even if I am jealous because my coworker does not have the same workload that I have (if I even notice it), he still has to sit here for the same duration as I do. Time can be compared so easily, which makes it great for reducing envy at the workplace, because on the surface everyone has to bring the same to the table.

Time can be spent regardless of my current motivation or productivity level, which can be a blessing and a curse. If I work harder than usual and try to get things done, time does not magically advance faster. So there is no incentive to push yourself. But if expected outcomes were the measurement, it would have the potential to introduce more stress if I can't realistically reach a goal. It could lead to a situation where I would constantly doubt myself if the work I have done is enough to satisfy the goals for this week. Time can shield me from this stress, as I know exactly when I reach my required hours.

The gifter's reward

2026-06-27T00:00:00Z

Gifting can be fulfilling. The gifting person almost always gains something as much as the receiver of our present. Many of our actions are driven by motivation. Gifting is also one of them. Seeing the other person happy or showing them how much we care rewards us enough to put effort into the gift. If we remove ourselves from the equation, the gift loses its purpose. We want the receiver to know that we made the effort to show our appreciation.

Anonymous gifts don't hold the same weight. We want to see the reaction or witness the effects the present had on our relationship. When choosing or creating the gift, we already think about how the person will like it or react to it, not merely how useful it is. The gift holds a permanent reference to the gifter and it can alter the relationship for the better.

There are people who get a lot out of the process of coming up with a gift, more than others. They will research and be creative. They want to make sure that the receiver knows how much effort it took. From the outside, it looks as if the process were more like a hobby, because they really enjoy it.

This only applies to personal gifts, where we put effort into choosing something for the other person. It has to come from our own motivation and not from obligation, for example when the other person has already decided what they want.

My care ends with me

2026-06-17T00:00:00Z

Without me, there would be no observer that could experience or assign values to things. If I had not been born, there would be no one who would know that something like an "existence" is even an option. I am the prerequisite for my world to exist. If I died, my world would die with me. If ten minutes after my death the world were to end, I would be indifferent to it, because I am no longer there to have any feelings about it. I do care about people, but that care is only present when there is a subject that can express it.

As long as I live, my care extends beyond my death. What I mean by that: When I imagine the time after my death, I do care for that time too and wish for my friends and family to have a good time. But I can only experience these feelings while I live. In some sense, I am the most important person in my life, because without me, there is nothing. This does not mean that I can't value someone's life higher than mine, it just means that even in this case, I am the requirement for that evaluation.

I know that may sound egoistic, but I really want my care to outlast me. The problem is that it physically can't.

Being so comfortable that I can think about happiness

2026-06-10T00:00:00Z

I have no big struggles at the moment. Weeks are flowing into one another and every week feels roughly the same, with small deviations. Months fly by in the blink of an eye. I am mostly healthy and can pursue my hobbies in my free time. I have a great social circle and I am blessed with wonderful friends. I feel privileged to not feel miserable, because many people don't share that experience. They feel empty inside, have mental or physical problems or have a hard time staying afloat.

I can make myself feel worse if I focus on what life has to give to me or what I want from life. I wonder if that's it, if that is everything life has to give. I also wonder what could still that hunger inside of me, wanting more out of my existence. Creating things makes me happier overall, but it still does not satisfy my hunger. When I listen to my inner voice, I doubt that one single thing can make me truly happy.

It is great to have the headspace to think about stuff like this. I'm near the top of the hierarchy of needs, because I can focus on my self-actualization without facing immovable obstacles. But that opens the door to another kind of unhappiness. There are so many possibilities and factors that can contribute to a good life and I am not sure what to pick, or which picks have the desired outcome. I experience decision paralysis thinking about the next steps I need to take and I don't want to make mistakes. Nothing pushes me in a specific direction because I feel comfortable.

Shouldn't I enjoy feeling comfortable?

No theory too stupid

2026-06-07T00:00:00Z

There is no theory too stupid to believe in. If there exists an idea about something, people will defend it. So I no longer wonder how people can believe in a theory that is so far removed from reality that you have to abandon all reason and logic to come to such a conclusion. You can apparently make every concept work in your head if you try hard enough. And it is more exciting to assign made-up explanations to events that happen for no specific reason and often out of randomness than to just admit that there was no great plan behind them. It gives us control.

"If the earth were flat, people would believe that it was a globe"

I even think it helps a theory to spread if it is stupid because people will think "There is no way someone can believe in this and go so strongly against the grain without being absolutely certain that it's the truth." This can lead to people investigating that theory. One little snippet of truth in a huge pile of misinformation can make you question some parts of the original generally agreed-upon theory, which makes you wonder "If this is true, what else are they hiding?".

Being part of a small exclusive club that has "uncovered" the truth that no one else can see is what makes people hold on to their ideas. Here they find community and even more arguments for their beliefs. If other people think the same, how wrong can it really be? There must be at least some truth to it. If they disclose this to their family or friends, it is even harder to go back now. Now they are seen as the "crazy one". Rather lean fully into it and show them their ignorance! We should be less aggressive towards those people, because that makes them recoil into their convictions even more. Going against was one of the initial appeals, so giving them the cold shoulder will not help at all.

Repeating patterns in our journal entries

2026-06-02T00:00:00Z

One often overlooked benefit of journaling is recognizing our own thinking patterns. Because journaling records our thoughts, after some time we should have an index of the things we think about. We can use this to our advantage to tackle worries or negative emotions in a structured way.

When we write, we tend to use the same phrases, the same nouns, or the same names in our journal entries. I am often able to notice these patterns during a writing session, because the phrases feel so familiar, like I am repeating myself. But we can also actively search for these repetitions by browsing through the pages or searching for words that we think we have written before (when journaling digitally).

Investigation

We often combine descriptive writing with a more reflective approach after it, to make sense of a situation or to draw conclusions from it.

If we rely solely on descriptive writing, we can only see the pattern in the things that happen to us and what they made us feel. Because we now can recognize that something bothers us again and again, it is the right time to reflect on the experiences. This only makes sense when we view these reoccurring patterns as something we want to eliminate, because it would make our lives better. These situations are not always solvable. Sometimes we use journaling to just vent about events or life situations that are inevitable, and while we can't solve the situations themselves, we can still draw conclusions to help us deal with them, or extract reason from events after describing them first. This is also known as "Reflection-on-action": to look at what happened in the past to find patterns and to learn from them (as opposed to "Reflection-in-action": thinking while doing something). In conclusion, pattern recognition is helpful here to define a target for our reflective writing. I will also suggest some questions you could ask yourself.

"Why do I act this way?"
"How will I deal with this in the future?"
"Can such situations be prevented going forward?"
"Why does this happen again and again and how much does it bother me?"
"What kind of person do I want to be when such a situation emerges?"

Not meeting the own expectations

But what happens when we have already come to conclusions or even have suggested a solution to a specific problem to ourselves through journaling? This is a more interesting case, because we have identified that something is weighing us down and that we want to tackle it, but the self-suggested solution has not worked as expected. Here, we have to dig deeper and find out why our approach did not work. What stopped us from pursuing our goal and fixing the problem? Coming up with a plan and writing it down can feel like a victory in itself, making it easier to forget that we also have to pursue the plan, which is often harder than previously assumed. Were we over-optimistic? Or was the plan just not realistic? Here are also some questions that can help with finding an answer.

"When did I forget about my ambitions?"
"What are triggers that I have to look out for to make the right decisions?"
"Was this solution within my control?"
"What do I now think of this solution after some time has passed?"
"Can I maybe take smaller steps to get closer to a solution?"

Seeing a pattern is the easy part. Making sense of them, reflecting on them, and understanding ourselves with regards to our actions is harder. But the hardest part is to actually change something. So we should not be frustrated when a plan doesn't work right away. It is already a significant step to commit to controlling negative emotions and influences.