Have chess engines technically "solved" chess? Has it ruined the mystery and creativity of the game?

They have ruined online chess. That's for sure.

Chess960 is nearly solved just like chess. Although neither is solved perfectly (tournaments between engines is still unpredictable) 960 is just shuffling of normal chess pieces so engines analyze it too at a point no human wins.

If you really wanna break out of the solved-game syndrome then you'll need to be more drastic with rules changes like add new pieces (archbishop griffon examples) or change the board (infinite board example) go check it out at the variants forum.👽

I think engines will never destroy chess, because chess isn't just about best moves (which engines make).

.. As far as boardgame 'engines' are concerned ; It's Not just chess, that has essentially been solved, with 'A.I.'; But, the game of 'Go', {or 'weiqi'}, also !

.. As, within, the past 36 hours; You may-or-may-not, be aware, that 'Google's 'A.I' 'weiqi', virtual 'super-computer'; Just handed, the Numero Uno, Chinese 'Go' champion, of the world ; A humbling, 3 win, to 'zip' {0}, loss !  ..{as any 'weiqi' News-page search, will confirm}.

P.s. - 'Fwiw'.. The game of 'Go', has several magnitudes, Greater permutations, {of possible moves}, than chess. o:

hurry up, somebody solve chess with their cheatin engine so we can all quit.

What happens when you match up identical supercomputers with identical engine?

1/2 - 1/2

.. Game, of 'Go', world champ, humbled, by "Alpha-Go" .. 3-to-'zip'.

https://eblnews.com/video/exclusive-ke-jie-wants-you-know-weiqi-fun-and-easy-learn-115076

No, Chess is not solved, and won't be for a long time. 

And I absolutely love chess engines, and the powerful and incredible things we can do with them. It makes Chess almost an entirely new game. 

With that being said, if I could push a button, and take Chess computing back to the 1990s, I probably would. We had to do it all ourselves then, and that's what made it fun. Now, knowing every person you play, down to the middle school players has a 6 million game database, a 3400 engine, and has whatever line they want solved out to 15 moves does kind of ruin the first third of the chess game. 

Chess isn't solved, nor ruined, but the opening has been effectively ruined by engines. The most fun part of Christmas is getting to open the present and not knowing what you're going to get. The same used to be true of the opening in Chess. 

.. I differentiate, between saying that, chess has 'essentially, been solved'; And, definitively, {in all respects}, been solved.

.. Sure, there's an odd or obscure position, that, even the 'Best' chess-engine, won't see ..{half the time 'composed'.. and unlikely, to come up, in a game}..

.. But, their overall advantage, in calculating 'faster', {as in 'blitz' chess}.. And, of course, Not getting tired, or having mood swings.. Goes a Long way, in accurately stating, {imho}, that, Yes ; For All practical purposes, 'A.I.', {artificial intelligence}, has 'essentially' solved chess.

Which, is why, 'Carlsen', and All the 'Top' players, will Not, submit, to a 'Komodo', or 'Fritz', latest iteration, {extended}, blitz 'match'; Barring, a sizable appearence fee ; For likely, having to 'eat', 'humble pie'! o:

Wow, this is a series of rants by idiots.

Some games will end in draws, sometimes white will win, and rarely black will win.

Engines following code will not even play a game the same way each time because the clocks stop the tree search at different points and processing speed is affected by what other things the cpus are doing.

No.

There are positions which are assessed in one way by an engine and in other way by humans. And, after some moves, chess engines "agree" with humans.

Typically, these are positions with positional sacrifices.

Poker has been solved, actually solved (i.e. there is an engine that cannot lose the game) - could you tell it from looking at the professional games?  Even when chess is solved by a computer and an optimal play for each side is found, humans still aren't machines, we make mistakes - for humans, chess won't be solved ever... Unless we get to the point of merging with machines, but by then we probably will come up with much more complex games challenging our new abilities.

Also, you have some misconceptions here. Logical thinking and creative thinking aren't mutually exclusive. Math is as logical as it can get, it is probably the most logical discipline in the world, and there is a loooooot of room for creativity there. Chess is no different, and the recent popularization of multiple game modes, such as 960, king of the hill, crazyhouse, all kinds of unusual time controls, etc. means that the days of the game aren't numbered, but, in contrary, we are probably entering the golden era in chess, with a lot of room for creativity and innovativeness.

Chess engines are computers and computers are horrible when picking random moves.  in other words they will respond to what you move, they have no incentive to win.

Humans are becoming more and more intelligent with every next generation. Perhaps at some point best chess players won't make mistakes, and they will easily draw chess engines in classical chess at least (maybe more time is needed to also draw them in chess 960).

I coached high school varsity softball and, during batting practice on non-game days, we used a pitching machine that threw strike after strike after strike and could be set to throw faster than anyone on the team.  But it never occurred to us to compare the machine to the all-county all star windmill pitcher on our team, because the machine was seen as a simple aid to making human play better and the game was all about what the teenage girl athletes did.

Similarly, I don't see a chess machine ruining chess because the variations possible in good play are still too many to allow players to memorize forced wins.

Even if computers ever did (or could) "solve" chess, it wouldn't ruin the game. The only way the game could be ruined for a person was if THEY had solved it... or every other chess player in the world had...

I don't think humans are becoming more intelligent, though we do have much more information.  Before the printed book became common, ordinary humans in the Middle Ages used their memory in ways that would be considered amazing.  They would hear a bard passing through town sing of news, go home, and sing the entire report after hearing it one. 

For me, calculators didn't become common in science and math classes until I was in college, so I grew up with the slide rule.  Consequently, because they never experienced having to carry powers of 10 in your head often enough to make it easy. my gifted students would be absolutely amazed at how I could solve relatively complicated science formulas in my head as I worked at the board.

So I don't think the ability to calculate, as well as that to recognize geometric patterns has increased.