Obviously the first is the bigger achievement, in that regard. However, that analogy is completely flawed assuming you're talking about who is the 'best' runescape player. In your post, making $1B is the end goal. So it would be more appropriately compared to: Which is a bigger achievement - Inheriting a maxed account, or maxing an account yourself? A more appropriate, but similar analogy, would be doing something great with the $1B. Where making money isn't the overall goal, and instead a means to an end. Obviously, assuming everything else is equal, the person that had to make their own money could be said to have the greater achievement assuming they both reach the goal in a similar fashion. However, if the person who inherited the money achieved that goal faster (excluding time making money), more efficiently, and with greater dedication; I would argue that is the better achievement - assuming the money making is only a small portion of the overall achievement. Still, one was given the tools to succeed and one had to work for it. Why does only the 2nd half (excluding the money making) of the process effect the achievement when it should be viewed as a whole. I do honestly think Suomi is the greatest player if you take everything into consideration, but if you take out donations I do think others would've had a chance.