site banner

Small-Scale Question Sunday for September 11, 2022

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

12
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Few hypotheses (based on experience, wrapped in theory):

  1. Hedonic treadmill. Your rotation system might still have a low "essential" variation, so that brain can predict/remember the most salient patterns, after which new songs don't excite/surprise it. Intermittent silence helps

  2. Attention. When you listen as a background to other activities, it might feel much less exciting, as attention spreads among inputs. Concert, in contrast, grabs all your sensory inputs at once

I think both of those on are point. I've been thinking a LOT about the hedonic treadmill and how so many people probably burn themselves out unintentionally because they can binge literally any media they want constantly, and especially for TV shows and movies, there's really a very limited number of truly unique, top-quality works in a given genre. Once you've sampled those, you're pretty much left with nothing but increasingly inferior imitators. After you watch The Godfather, you can slide over to Goodfellas et. al., then maybe Scarface, and there's a handful of other contenders for 'classic' gangster flicks. Then maybe watch The Sopranos, maybe Boardwalk Empire and then I'd wager that nothing else will measure up.

So funny enough I try to avoid doing this to myself with, e.g. books, TV shows, and video games.

But music is so much more of an ambient, omnipresent factor one might not think about how much is consumed every day. People never really describe themselves as 'binging' music, right?

Also, in concert the artists can improvise or add new elements to existing songs so the combination of pleasant familiarity and intriguing novelty, on top of the full engagement of the senses, helps revive the musical experience. IMO.

So funny enough I try to avoid doing this to myself with, e.g. books, TV shows, and video games.

How do you avoid it? Watching different stuff, not watching anything/doing something else, or another way?

Yup.

With video games, in particular, if there's a game that gets exceptional acclaim from critics and players alike and it seems like it'd be right up my alley, I make a conscious effort NOT to board the hype train and jump right into playing it at the earliest chance. Indeed, I'll usually wait until it has been out for several months before even purchasing it.

I did this for Red Dead Redemption 2, which was a REAL challenge since RDR1 is one of my top 10 faves of all time. The idea is to hold off on playing it until the mood strikes me 'naturally,' when I actually feel the urge to play that sort of game! And when I do play, I make a deliberate effort to finish the game in a timely fashion even if this means not going for 100% completion.

So I end up switching between genres and series and try to avoid crippling my ability to enjoy a new game by playing too many similar ones. I've found racing games are a useful "palatte cleanser" for me. It helps that recently so many extremely anticipated games have, upon release, ended up being massive disappointments. I think I've saved myself a lot of grief and wasted time.

Similar with books and movies. Don't read/watch stuff in the same series without taking a break. Switch between genres, switch from fiction to nonfiction.

On that note, the final book in one of my favorite series is releasing soon and I'm genuinely excited for it!

TV is the hardest to self-regulate since it is so easy to just veg out on the couch and watch 10 episodes in a sitting. But I've narrowed down the series that I actually follow to a bare handful, and I force myself to pace my watch speed a bit.

It sounds like a neat trick for tv shows and books, and I am going to try to apply it there (cheers!) but I already do that with games sort of. With most games I give myself a week to finish them, or hook me, otherwise I move on. And with exploratory platformers I try to do it the week they are released, so I can potentially find secrets no one else has (it's very satisfying).

But rdr2, I could never get sick of that game. If a game leans heavy into making shit diegetic I try and get lost in it, and often succeed. I got kind of addicted to it in far cry 2 (the best one) and then rdr (I actually appreciated how much of a pain in the ass it was to get the horseman horses in undead nightmare, because it gave me an excuse to cowboy it up) and now rdr2.

I got kind of addicted to it in far cry 2 (the best one)

You and I would probably get along really well. FC2 is one of my favorites as well despite admitting it has flaws; I truly appreciate almost all the game design decisions that went into it and wish that later entries has retained more of them. Far Cry 4, by comparison, is great fun, but it doesn't quite scratch the itch.

But rdr2, I could never get sick of that game. If a game leans heavy into making shit diegetic I try and get lost in it, and often succeed

Same thing happened to me. Basically I accepted the fact that I was mainly going to treat RDR2 as an old west simulator and all the plot shit was just background.

In fact, I tend to treat most open-world games that way. Assassin's Creed IV was a pirate simulator. Valheim for viking simulator (never tried AC: Valhalla). Arma if I want to feel like a front-lines grunt. I just wanna immerse myself in an alternate world for a while sometimes, right?

That's effectively how I determine what games I am actually in the mood to play. "What do I feel like being today? Pirate? Cowboy? Goat?" Then pick accordingly from the best option available.