The nature of high-level chess is that typically you play positionally until you wear your opponent's position down, whereupon a tactically winning move becomes possible. You also watch the entire time for tactically winning moves as a result of single mistakes. Some implications of this statement:
(1) You also have to learn when a position *looks* like a tactical move could clearly win. In other words, recognize when the board position starts to look like a chess puzzle.
(2) The majority of the game will typically not look like a puzzle.
(3) Normal tactics during the course of the game will not look like puzzle tactics, either, except in some cases where your opponent made a mistake.
(4) Winning tactics are the icing on the cake, that typically culminate a long positional game. Therefore to play good chess you must know both strategy and tactics. It doesn't help to reach a winning position strategically if you can't recognize when you've arrived and/or can't pull off the needed tactics, and it doesn't help to know tactics if you can't reach positions where they're needed and/or don't recognize them when you're there.
(5) It's a mistake to focus your play on setting up traps because often a trap-setting move isn't the best move.
I seem to have a talent for solving chess puzzles when I know there is some trick to find. I've solved a lot of puzzles on other sites with very difficult ratings. However, when I play an actual game I just feel completely lost. I play moves that have obvious weaknesses. I play moves to set up tactics that are shortsighted and easily countered. How do you translate puzzle knowledge into real game knowledge?