I came to this conclusion in college. It was hard enough learning math, thermo, physics, etc., and seemed a complete waste of time to get better at chess. The former consumed my mental energies.
(Obligatory "I didn't downvote you")
I have found it interesting to write software to play chess for me. The last few times I tried to play chess, my mind would just drift off designing a program to do it so I wouldn't have to bother.
I don't play video games, either. It takes about 3 minutes for one to bore me to tears. Part of that is I had a job in college testing video games - that sure ruined it for me.
The universe is full of puzzles that mean something to solve. Why not work on those instead? Why would those be less interesting than a contrived set of rules?
Because those rules are designed (often iteratively) to be interesting. They have exactly the right rate of progress/reward to be engaging. In some research areas today it takes two years of postgrad work just to get to the point where you're capable of doing original research - and there's no guarantee that you'll produce anything useful even then.
Acquiring mastery of a skill is a fun experience, and drives a lot of human activity. Certainly most e.g. programming language designers seem to enjoy the skill and craft of doing it; I'm not at all convinced that that's not the real motivation for that activity, however much people claim to be driven by practical value or monetary reward.
Ultimately meaning is what we make it. People tend to enjoy games because they feel that they reflect something meaningful; a game is a "toy model" of reality, but toy models can be useful. There's a reason we consider these games to be interesting challenges and measures of progress for the same AIs that we also want to be able to e.g. drive cars.
Because "contrived rules" are a kind of work of art. This is especially evident in modern board games as the concept of "contrived rules" is refined more and more and in ever branching variations.
Can you give some examples? Most things I'm aware of that could be classified as puzzles require, at the very least, enormous time investment, if not specialization, and there's often lots of drudgery along the way.
Sure.
How can I get the D programming language to generate even faster code?
How can I take this piece of existing, working, kludgy code, and make it simple and elegant?
How do I distill the advantages of D into an elevator pitch?
What is the right combination of aftermarket parts that will make the engine in my Dodge deliver the characteristics I want?
How do I salvage a relationship with a valued colleague that has gone awry?
How do I optimize my investments to maximize returns?
I could go on forever.
It's just like doing hard physical work. Ya need a rest afterwards.
Chess isn't mindless entertainment. I don't see it as rest.
Solutions to difficult problems often come to me while I'm jogging. Something something about increased blood flow to brain? Yesterday I went out for a long walk, and thought of a much simpler solution than one I was going to implement. A very worthwhile walk!
>> last few times I tried to play chess, my mind would just drift off designing a program to do it so I wouldn't have to bother.
I do find a good game of chess to be enjoyable, though.