6 Relationship Games You Need to Know About

Before we proceed, let’s define what we mean by “games.” In the context of this article, a game is a series of communicative transactions (or social interactions) that follow a well-defined path and lead to a predictable outcome. In other words, these are manipulation games and, in some cases, mind control techniques.

What sets these games apart from ordinary forms of communication are two important qualities:

• an ulterior motive,
• and a payoff.

The Blame Game

“The blame game” was described as “If It Weren’t for You” by Eric Berne, a psychiatrist and the author of the book Games People Play: The Psychology of Human Relationships. Examples of the blame game may include:

• A wife who says to her husband, “If it weren’t for you, I would be an actress.”
• A father who says to his daughter, “If it weren’t for you, I would have my university degree.”
• A man who says to his wife, “If it weren’t for you, my life would be so much more exciting.”

The objective of this game is usually vindication. By blaming somebody else, we get the illusion that our own underperformance is justified. The game can be harmful because it instills a feeling of guilt in the other person while helping us escape responsibility.

Another common scenario is one in which a passive or fearful person chooses an authoritative partner who, as expected, restricts their activities. Not only does this allow the passive partner to avoid facing their fears, but they also get to play the “If It Weren’t for You” game: It’s not that I am incapable, it’s that he (or she) won’t let me.

One important thing to mention is that not every “If it weren’t for you” statement is necessarily manipulative. As much as we like to believe in self-empowerment and control over our lives, it would be ridiculous to deny that there are genuine victims and situations in which another person’s behavior really does limit someone’s choices.

The Provocation Game

Provocative behavior is another example of relationship games. There are several types of provocation, but one of the most interesting and less obvious is when a seemingly innocent person intentionally provokes someone with what appears to be an offhand remark or sincere advice that, of course, was never asked for.

Predictably, the other person explodes with rage while the provocateur gets several desirable outcomes:

• They can now get other people’s attention by having a pity party: “Why does this always happen to me?”
• They now have what they consider real proof of the other person’s maliciousness, which can later be used to their advantage.

From making the other person feel guilty to swaying other people’s opinions, the possible uses of the provocation game are many. This doesn’t mean that a short-tempered person isn’t accountable for the damage they cause, but it does mean that sometimes a conflict may have been deliberately set up by someone hoping to provoke a predictable reaction.

Eric Berne called one variation of this relationship game “Kick Me”: the player repeatedly behaves in ways that invite rejection or retaliation and then focuses on the reaction they receive.

The Control Game

In this game, the main player may not appear openly manipulative. Instead, they actively look for situations in which they can gain control and may become surprisingly invested when such a situation arises.

Usually, the main player (Mr. A) has some type of contract or agreement with another person (Mr. B) and is extremely inflexible about changing its terms. One might imagine that if Mr. B breaks the rules, Mr. A will simply be upset and disappointed. In reality, however, the situation may give Mr. A exactly what he wants: now Mr. B is completely at his mercy.

Mr. A’s way of setting up the game is to establish very strict rules around something. It could be a special food request at a restaurant or a payment agreement that cannot go over a certain amount. Of course, not every strict agreement means that someone is trying to control you, but unreasonable stubbornness combined with a complete unwillingness to compromise can be worth paying attention to.

The primary goal of this game is control over another person. Another possible payoff is getting some sort of benefit in exchange for forgiveness.

The Buck-Passing Game

The buck-passing game involves shifting one’s own responsibility or blame onto another person.

For example, a manager might give their subordinates the authority to make important decisions for reasons that have nothing to do with democracy or teamwork: if things go well, the manager takes the credit. If things go wrong, there is someone else to point at.

The game can be played in a family environment as well. One partner may leave the other entirely responsible for running the household, dealing with the children, or paying the bills. Not only does the player escape responsibility, but they also have someone to blame if the outcome is less than desirable.

The Double Bind Game

The double bind game occurs when the main player puts another person in a disadvantageous situation where either choice may lead to criticism or a negative outcome.

For example, a supervisor may intentionally delegate a difficult task to someone who isn’t qualified for that level of work and then criticize them when they fail. Or one partner may ask the other to help with something even though both know beforehand that whatever they do will later be criticized.

In the first case, the goal could be getting the person fired or “showing them their place.” In the second, the goal might be to make the partner feel guilty or inadequate, or simply to create another conflict.

Internet marketers have also borrowed a version of this tactic. Annoying newsletter popups sometimes present you with two choices:

• Choice No. 1: Sign up for our newsletter and become lean, attractive, and successful!
• Choice No. 2: No, I don’t want to lose weight. I would rather stay fat.

The only way to close the popup without giving your email address is to choose No. 2. Although most people probably won’t take the wording literally, the tactic is still manipulative because it makes declining the offer deliberately unpleasant.

Tell Me I Am Right

“Tell Me I Am Right” is a three-person game in which two parties have a disagreement and supposedly turn to a third person to resolve the conflict.

In reality, they don’t necessarily want the conflict resolved, and they aren’t interested in negotiating anything. What each person really wants is for the third party to say, “You’re right, and the other person is wrong.”

Siblings play this game with their parents, employees play it with their supervisors, and it can become particularly complicated when couples decide to “get counseling” and try to pull their counselor, a trained professional, into the game. Unless the counselor recognizes what is happening and refuses to take sides, very little may actually get resolved.