My eyebrows raised as well by the suggestion of your "advisor" that you need a $3M nest egg. Given that 50% of American's make less than $50K annually, that even if you were in the top 1% of wage earners this year (which is all of a few hundred people, incidentally), but quite possibly be unemployed the next, that $3M figure looks suspect given that it is suggested by only one source.
It you read the statistics put out this past week by the conference of mayors you will find that only the top 5%--at most--could have $3m to retire. That study also showed how wealth inequality has increased in the past several years, will continue to increase, perhaps dramatically, by city, by US region. Studies by the CIA, the British equivalent of the CIA and the OECD all say the same thing. Then there's the Fed's release this week showing that 40% of Americans are in some type of financial trouble, that most couldn't come up with $400 if an emergency arose, and that the average retirement savings is miniscule.
This thread is testament to the fact that success/happiness amounts to successfully navigating a series of constant life events. Life events do have a tendency to impact our financial lives (i.e., divorce, job loss, serious health issue). Setting unreasonably high retirement savings goals only compounds these issues, and the disappointment/psychological dislocation that can ensue. Boglehead polls show the majority don't have anywhere near $3M in savings when they retire. If you don't think this is true, just ask
It is far easier to reduce spending/cut costs than to save. In fact, it's been repeatedly shown that only those able to delay gratification by having a healthy relationship with materialism are able to retire, and stay retired, successfully. A rather startling example is John McAfee, of McAfee anti-virus, whose net worth fell from $200M to just $4M, due to overspending in real estate (among other mistakes).
Your Money or Your Life by Dominguez is a good place to start thinking differently about all this.