According to Ellul the question we should be asking is not in regards to technology per se, but in face what is “technique” ? When we define that, the rest will unfold all in good time. First things first, Elluls definition of technique was quite murky and opaque to me. I ultimately reached a conclusion that I was looking too close and narrowing in, when in fact, what I should have been doing was to zoom out because the closer you look the less you see. Converging back to the point, Ellul reverberates that “technique” is no longer a secondary factor, no longer a means to an end or the middle man between society and the natural milieu, technique is indeed an end in and of itself. Technique has indeed adopted a life of its own most notably in the west. Put differently, technique is the habitat and Milieu in which the modern modern population is planted, and quite firmly at that. In a “technique” society it indeed encompasses machines, but is not limited to that per se. it stretches, in an overbearing manner, to social and cultural aspects that eclipse the essence of how human beings and society are constructed to essentially manage other physical techniques. Moreover, technique applies to human behavior and more or less paves the way to conform us to act one way, which is to satisfy technique first and foremost before all else. With that being said, the primitive machine, if you will, had a healthy and somewhat static relationship between it and man. The relationship was not codependent but in fact separate and emulated the concept: “To each his own''. But unfortunately that relationship was short lived and transient. Consequently, the relationship now has taken a wrong turn and the lines are quite murky and opaque to where we as humans end and the machine begins.

Referring back to your point of how technology profoundly influences individual psychology, zooming in on the entertainment industry that encompasses aspects that include but are not limited to: Gaming (as per your example), movies, T.V shows, the news and so on and so forth. All the former are agents used to somewhat numb the pain that pervades inside us due to our innate wiring not being congruent to how society is constructed today. The industrial revolution was in some ways the beginning of the end. Today’s modern technological society is alien and foreign to how we have been carefully curated to live as human beings. We have innate tendencies to gravitate towards lives adjacent to now obsolete hunter gatherers. Solving potent problems that can very much maneuver the course of our lives, which in turn results in happiness. Because indeed, happiness does come from solving problems. With that being said, in today’s society, the very bottom block , which are physiological aspects have been, for the most part, met. Nevertheless, having a roof over ones head, food brought to you in 30 minutes or less, and no predetorial animals learking in the shadows Indeed seems like progress from an outsiders lens. But how did that transition impact our mental health? There have been studies done on tribes who emulate the lives of nomadic hunter gatherers and it is scientifically proven that the have zero rate of depression and anxiety. One factor dubs depression and anxiety as nonexistent is the fact that everyday is a completely novel day with new challenges and truly urgent encumbrances to face. Maintaining the roof over ones head, feeding the family , watching out for novice predators, and etc. With modern society, again as reverberated before, it is so far from the essence of what the lives of hunter gatherers once elicited. So where does that leave us today? Searching for other problems to solve? Or better yet, clamoring for distraction mechanisms to dub down the hollow innate part of us that is so resistant to what our world has become, eclipsing tedious and timid aspects like one of which: The corporate rate race.