Is chess a dense and annoying game in higher elo?

I feel like every chess game in low elo is kinda fun in a way where the unpredictability and mix of not being that good has quick fun games. Although when you reach higher elo like 1000-2k the game becomes very dense and annoying to play, you run through plays of openings and then middle game is a trade off of pieces but once we reach end game its just a long strategic wait until someone messes up. Anyone else agree? 

Try playing bullet or blitz if you feel that way, it will certainly add some of the unpredictability back to the moves.

It should only feel "dense" or "annoying" if your opponent is stronger than you are ...

If they're at the same level as you, it should feel challenging but still fun and manageable, where you both have equal chances to win.

And ideally you want to feel challenged ... otherwise what's the point? The game would become boring if it always felt easy ...

There are pros and cons to being higher rated, I like a challenge so I say it's more enjoyable.

Games between the very best can indeed seem rather boring, because most of the time they are. There are a lot less mistakes and a lot more draws to be had. However, it does become more entertaining when you know what you're doing and you're not just mindlessly moving pieces.

Furthermore, even grandmasters blunder. Most of the time they aren't obvious blunders, but rather ones that you'd have to have a fair bit of knowledge to understand and appropriately deal with. However, really dumb mistakes do occur sometimes, and it's not always because of time trouble. If anything, that should motivate you more, because you know that you'll never stop messing up. You only mess up less.

At the higher levels, chess does become more complex. But it also becomes more artistic and satisfying. It is NOT just trading and waiting for a mistake. Winning a game when one has played consistently from beginning to end is a wonderful feeling.

Watch the commentary on the Tata Steel Tournament that is going on currently. The top players in the world make mistakes. They take chances. The commentators discuss how the opening play leads to middlegame plans and even to endgame plans.

if you only play bullet and rapid chess where you race and wait for a bonehead mistake, you are missing out on the joy of chess.

Mr mikewier may we play a round please, its always been my dream to play any type of master pleaseee

thank you sir.

No, I would say chess has about the same enjoyment no matter what the level. A bit like football - whether it's a little kid or a world champion it's fun no matter the level. The only negative for the best players is they get tired of studying opening theory. But they still love it, maybe blitz and rapid are more exciting for them.

At the end of the day we're doing the same thing - trying to figure out how to get into a better position and mate the other king. "let's see will I move this guy here, oh no that would be bad, what about this other guy? that looks better, oh shoot I never realize he had this other great move". No matter how much headless chicken vs genius it may be it's still generally this type of activity and so appeals to human nature. Apologies if I traumatized anyone with my internal monologue but hopefully you get the point.

if you're overrated, then yes. Every opponent of yours is gonna be a tough nut to crack (unless they're not playing in great form which happens often online), where you just hold out and wait for them to make a mistake because you cant outplay them positionally.

While endgames has it's own beauty, I can understand why some would find it boring. Try to keep pieces on the board. We are around the same rating and I do get many opponents who just trades everything off, but I try to avoid that unless it's absolutely necessary or if it benefits me. Keep pieces on, win tactically in the middle game.

While I can appreciate and have enjoyed beautiful endgames, there are days where I too just can't deal with it and get bored. So I kinda get where you're coming from.