OK, quick review. I wrote

'In sum: A game is a rule-defined activity involving a state which counts as performing the activity successfully because it is so defined by an arbitrary rule, an activity typically performed for the recreation of participants or spectators, or to sharpen skills.    ...

I added: 'Notice that checkmate isn't success because we strive for it; rather, we strive for checkmate because, according to the rules, it is success. Games have the feature that the success state is in this way internal to the rules. The immediate object of a game is to accomplish the state the rules define as success because it is so defined.'

Brit wrote earlier (sorry for not getting back sooner) that ‘it seems that your analysis predicts that doing philosophy, throwing a party, being in a relationship/dating etc are games.  They are rule-defined activities and arbitrary rules define what counts as performing them successfully (publish n number of articles in these journals, etc/invite more than n number of people to a pre-determined location, make sure some of them show up, serve something you bought or they brought etc./engaging in romantic activities on a regular basis, some mutual understanding that it will continue until one person verbally calls an end to it, etc).’

It seems to me doing philosophy successfully means arriving at the truth ('You may say that I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one...') And the reason we want that is because we see
the truth as valuable, if only because we are deeply curious about it.  So we pursue the success state because it is intrinsically valuable.  If doing philosophy successfully means professional success, then professional success is pursued either because we view it as intrinsically valuable and/or instrumentally valuable (more money). So getting the truth or getting tenure and promotion and fame are success because we strive for them, we don’t strive for them because, according to an arbitrary rule (or any rule) they are success. (Also publishing lots of influential papers in prestigious journals isn't success because a rule says it is.)  So philosophy isn’t a game. We typically seek the goal of a party, to collectively have a good time, because we want to have a good time, fun being intrinsically valuable, not because an arbitrary rule says that having lots of fun at a party is success. (Inviting a number of people,  having them show up, serving something, is sufficient for having a party, but not sufficient for a successful party. One can succeed at performing an activity, for many activities, without necessarily performing it successfully.)  Similarly the greater friendship or intimacy that results from a successful date isn’t sought because a rule says it's success, rather we seek intimacy because we consider it intrinsically valuable.

About football: football is rarely played by professionals; and professionals play it for the recreation of spectators.