No, not because "it has no reset button". That's boring and if, like me, you first played video games in arcades where your mum would only give you one coin, not obviously true. There's a couple of other fallacies that I want to tackle. The general heading is "life is not fair". Firstly life has no obligation to let you win. Secondly, life does not give everyone the same 100 skill points to start with.
There's a fact most people dont realise when they play games, it's been specifically designed so that you can win. The game world may seem natural and real, but it obeys rules. One rule, too obvious to think of normally, is that there is a (large) set of sequences of button-presses that result in the "YOU WIN" screen. This rule is so obvious that we dont realise it's not a law of logic. It's perfectly possible for a one player game to have no way to win. If you play tic-tac-toe against a reasonable player you cannot win. If you play the MIU game you will never reach MU.
And this isn't just an observation about abstract games. It's an observation about life. There are some things that no matter how smart you are, no matter how hard you try, no matter how much you want, you cant have. You cant have a machine that generates free energy. It doesn't matter if you wish upon a star, you wont win that game. It doesn't matter how hard you try, it's not clear that *everyone* has a set of actions they can take to become world basketball champion. It's not clear that *everyone* can become the head of a fortune 500 company.
And this is even true about games that humanity as a whole is playing. Just because the whole of humanity tries to do something doesn't mean they'll succeed. It doesn't matter how much money you throw at it, it's not obvious that it's even theoretically possible for humans to cure virus in the next 20 years. It's not obvious that the renewable energy project can succeed on straightforward thermodynamic principles. We shouldn't assume humanity is omnipotent.
There's a point to this other than depressing you and stopping you from going on the fucking X-factor. Before you start your project be careful that you have considered every option. If you pick the project "become the greatest basketball player ever" and you are 4ft tall then it's safe to say you are going to waste your life. You're allowed to amount to nothing. 99.99% of all the humans that have ever lived did not matter at all, they were useless, they picked a project they couldn't succeed at. And when you do pick this project you ignore the project you could have done. You forget that you could have sat down and done something else, and won.
The second fallacy is one much loved by a certain kind of hippie/middle class/mother figure, the kind of person who thinks everyone is special. This is what I like to call the Dungeons and Dragons fallacy. It runs something like this: When creating your character what nature does is take 100 points and distribute them amongst various categories like "drawing skill", "hight", "maths ability", "attractiveness" etc. so people have a different balance but the same sum. This is the implicit idea whenever the fact that Alice is better than Bob at the Xylophone is countered by the assertion that Bob is probably better than Alice at Yachting.
You've all heard people defend someone's low IQ by saying it doesn't measure some property, often creativity, with the implication that the low IQ person will be far more creative. Just plain false I'm afraid, there's no a priori reason why little Timmy cant be both bad at verbal reasoning *and* uncreative. There are many people who are bad at a wide range of things. Likewise there are many people who are good at a wide range of things. Unless you can point to a causal link between two abilities that tends to make them balance there is no reason why being bad at something could be reason to be happy.
This is quite a broad failure of reasoning. There is an implicit assumption in a lot of people's reasoning that nature should be "fair". We're taught in stories that the bad guy always gets his comeuppance. We are told that the little ugly duckling always turns out to be beautiful on the inside. And I'm sorry, there's no reason to think so. There is no god who "ought to be fair", there is the blind bumping of wavefunctions, they dont give a damn if you're thick *and* ugly.
We often console ourself looking at someone we envy that they are just bound to have a flaw. We may loose to them at XYZ but there must be some area where we beat them. Sorry, just not true, in a world of 7 billion humans and rising it's just a statistical falsehood. There are people out there who on any axis you care to name are strictly worse that you. There is someone who's less romantically successful, has a lower IQ, is less creative, less good at drawing, less expressive, less attractive. And there are people who are better than you, at everything. I know this to be true of myself because I've met the motherfucker. There are people out there who are better at writing, better at thinking, more creative, more loving, more attractive, more composed, less likely to burn out from stress.
I'm sorry if this is a depressing post. There isn't a way to say it other than "life isn't fair". You cannot assume that things will just work out towards some kind of balance. The laws of physics do not require any such thing. The important thing is to accept this universe and not go mad in it. The important thing is to accept life isn't fair. To accept there's a guy who's strictly better than you who will beat you at anything they set their mind to. Then work around it. Dont fight them on that project, do something else, do some project where you're not the best person who could possibly do it, but the best person who *is* doing it. There are few pure mathematicians who could honestly say that John Conway could not have replicated their work had he set his mind to it. Mathematics did not stop and wait for him to die. It carried on, most mathematicians knowing that John Conway and a dozen others could just stomp on their pet project and solve it any moment, but also knowing that if they didn't it still needed to be solved.
There are some projects that cannot be solved, there are some that can partially be solved and there are some that can be totally solved. You have a finite amount of effort you can put into all of your projects in the next year. The lesson is to pick the right projects. You cant always know which is which. Sometimes life can still kill you while you're not looking. But whenever you can know, whenever you can predict, pick a project that you can solve and that you should solve. Because sometimes everyone else is waiting for you to do it.