Redefining success is a good idea, particularly for those folks that think success is having all the wealth in the world, which seems to be a lot of people.  I note that MMORPGs are an obvious proof of the simplest definition being completely contrary to enjoyment of the game.  A lot of such games exist in which there is no 'win' now.  Winning is simply the ability to keep playing in an enjoyable, diverse community.

Back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, I played a game called Diablo II.  In the game it was possible to kill other players and take their stuff, so a group called Player Killers came about that did this, and their definition of success was to kill a player and take their stuff, rather than kill Diablo and end the game.  A hacking tool called a trainer was created, and players could make themselves immortal, with so many hit points you could just stand there and let the final boss of the game beat on you for hours without dying.

I did not like the player killers, because they caused a lot of new players a lot of grief (which is what they were after).  So, using the trainer I'd make myself immortal and set up a portal (through which other players could come to your position) from Diablo's final boss battle to the surface and then ask for help dealing with some trivial problem from other players.  

Player killers would always gleefully pretend to be coming to help me with the witches on level 10, but intent on taking my newbie possessions and teabagging my corpse.  When they ported into the boss battle, they were surprised and killed Diablo - thus ending the game for them.  I laughed and laughed, griefing the griefers.

Winning is losing when you're focused on the wrong metric.  In many ways, banksters are just like player killers in Diablo II.  If they ever win the game, no one will be more disappointed than they, because once they have all the money in the world, it will become utterly worthless.