I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I've noticed the past generations played their games much further out than today's top players.  It seems nearly all games end in a resignation these days.  I really enjoy watching games from the past centuries where players actually reached checkmate or draw.  I guess that's just the way this game has evolved.

Resigning was a feature designed by certain chess players who don't care to checkmate their opponents and want them to give up because they are unwilling to play out the game.  Some have even taken to the point that they think you have no class unless you resign.  Some will even make remarks to try and induce you to resign.

I know some games are just "lost", and it would be impolite to continue playing, so I'm all for the resignation rule.  It just seems some top players quit too soon.

Although...if I were a better player I'm sure I would see the hopelessness of certain players' games!  That's the key, I'm sure.  I just am not good enough to see why resignation makes sense in many cases.

I guess modern life is all about "Results" and that "time is money" line. That's why the huge majority of players today just care about winning and doing it as soon as possible. So if the result seems obvious to them... why care playing?