Chess is just a game, with rigidly defined rules and win conditions. Real life is a fuzzy mix of ambiguous rules that may not apply and can be changed at any point, without any permanent win conditions.
I'm not convinced that it's impossible for computer to get there, but I don't see how they could be universally competitive with humans without either handicapping the humans into a constrained environment or having generalized AI, which we don't seem particularly close to.
Yes, I agree real life is fuzzy, I just chose chess as an example because it's unambiguous that machines dominate humans in that domain.
As for being competitive with humans: Again, how about running a scan of a human brain, but faster? I'm not claiming we're close to this, but I'm claiming that such a machine (and less-capable ones along the way) are so valuable that we are almost certain to create them.
I'm not convinced that it's impossible for computer to get there, but I don't see how they could be universally competitive with humans without either handicapping the humans into a constrained environment or having generalized AI, which we don't seem particularly close to.