To the OP - it helps a lot if you are young and with lots of time on your hands. If so it’s easier now than it has ever been; with computers the knowledge is all there and public in a way it never used to be, people become GMs at younger and younger ages.
But generally - a title is an external recognition of having attained a certain standard, nothing more or less, like exam grades, music exams, etc. With me, I got the rating needed for my title in my teens when I was already moving away from chess, but didn’t claim it for another twenty years when I returned to chess. When I was active OTB with a rating over 2200, I didn’t care about a title that Just said my rating was over 2200 (and anyway thought the only ‘proper’ titles were IM and GM). I only claimed it last year because it is useful for coaching and it’s fun to play in the titled arenas, or
chess.com titled Tuesday.
But generally in life achievements matter and it’s nice to have markers of recognition; although in chess, looking back what I am most proud of are my wins in various junior tournaments, as the lower titles of CM and FM just reflect ratings while winning tournaments has a greater psychological dimension.
And, say it not too loudly here, there is also the delicate question of whether - if you are going to make yourself *really good* at something in your late teens/early twenties - chess is the best choice.
