Sounds like you could learn some useful things from your opponents:
1. The 'book' moves of an opening are like that for a reason; they have proven to be effective. You can always try something else, but, because there are some basic necessities during the opening, you could be making more difficulties yourself by not observing these.
2. It is generally suggested to trade down when you have a significant lead in material. The reason, of course, is that when you do this, you end up with an end game where you will usually have a winning advantage.
3. Many people who are good at the endgame will try to get you there since A LOT of chess players are really weak in the ending.
So, as you can see, these are all normal activities in the game of chess.
Forgive my title lol. This may be more of a rant but something is bugging me lately. It feels like when I play against someone the opening is book. Feels very impersonal and generic. Same with the endgame. The only thing that "feels" like a game between two people is the middlegame.
Even that sometimes feels tainted because, for ex, if an opponent wins a piece, automatically trades down. Which, not to take anything away from playing for the win, but, I feel just attempts to drag both parties into the boring booky part of chess.
I dunno, I am certain I don't have the experience lots of people have but it's starting to feel very computer influenced rather than trying something different and have fun doing so.
Anyone experience this?