I keep hearing this complaint.
When your opponent just gives up a piece, or whatever the material, for nothing after playing sharp, tight, and superior chess, it ruins the verisimilitude of the game.
Back when the average decent player could still be better than the current software--like when I had Sargon IV and Chess Master 3000--I could win a reasonable seeming game, even if there was at times an artificially limited horizon effect on what the engine would not see. This was more an issue in the endgame. In the middle game one might win a pawn but then the fight was still on after that position was reached--you still had to win the game.
So how about searching out some old (and free) software and seeing how you do with it?
My Jade II hand held was a slightly superior opponent for me, so always a good challenge and, again, the games typically had a reasonable feel to them.
There may be an advantage to an engine/machine that tops at a few hundred points above your strength in terms of the feel of the games. If you score 30-40% against such an opponent that is good training and also gives you something to shoot for: equal and then surpass this engine/machine.
Of course, I am talking about long time control games.
Looking for advice regarding the most human chess software out there. I think we have all played games on software where it plays blindly well and then just hangs a piece to even things up. I have found Chessmaster to be a bit like this and Chess Genius to be a lot like this but Shredder to be the most human like that I have encountered. I'm not looking for the ultimate truth in chess when I want to play the computer, just something that can simulate playing against a real person.
Thanks