You haven't even played the game and call it mediocre. Just like you requested the OP to do these things, I request you to do this: Play a game before trying to judge its quality. Metacritic isn't the be all end all, unless you're a sheep.

Such terrible "logic". Those hours don't exist in a vaccuum. One hour spent playing one game is not the same as one hour playing another game.
If the 100 hour game had each hour as good and high-quality as The Order's, yes, i'd pay 1000 dollars. But you know, that's an impossible feat. Nobody can do it, no matter the budget or development time.
And quality/content have a reverse correlation, as the more content you pour into a game, the worse it gets. Outside of traditionally long genres like RPGs, all best games in genres are fairly short games.

But hey..if you want to actually do math go ahead. I'll stick with what I feel while I play a game and after I finish it, instead of grabbing a calculator so that a machine can tell me if it was worth it or not.

I think this comparison is an over exaggeration.

For starters, I'm still not finished with my first play through of the order despite playing over an hour a night. I must be doing something wrong. (I didn't start it on easy mode and had fun, I mean trouble, in some of the fights, my mistake)

Anyway you are questioning whether $10/hour is good value for entertainment.
That's an easy yes, especially if there is no padded filler content and no busy work.
You can finish Portal in 4 hours, Bioshock in 5 hours, Gears of war, HL2, Portal 2 in 7, Super mario bros in 5 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ24UHbhFM8 (Sure that's a speedrun, yet the gameboy version I bought for a plane ride was over in an hour for me)

I have a lot better memories of all of those than I have of all the filler content in Skyrim.

How do you conclude I didn't play it?

And besides, some people always will love even the crappiest games. If you compare The Order and MH you can see: 20 points more on Metacritic (surely all biased as hell for a japanese game), more sales and older Monster Hunters are played by a committed community even years after release. So a lot more people obviously think Monster Hunter is better than The Order. That's a bit more than the anecdotal: "But I liked it." I like some games other people don't like. I don't just assume they are all wrong.

You have GTA in your nick and assassins creed in your avatar. Both game-series have a lot of content and can probably be played for 100 hours and more. So can be assumed your comment condenses your experiences with these two series?

Just no.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/445101-devil-may-cry/41182156

You can even power your way through the giant games like gta3 in a handful of hours if you just go from story mission to story mission... you might not even get a handful of hours from it.

http://www.speedrun.com/gtaiii

I admit that both the series are a bit repetitive near the 100 hour mark, but I really enjoy them overall.

Even the order get some repetitive elements (similar QTE-events/similar fights), but the overarching point here is enjoyment. I criticised the OP, because he condensed value alone to length, and brought up enjoyment. So even a highly repetitive game is great, if the repetition is enjoyable. So this is the true value of a game, not length, not surprises, not cinematic experience, not the story, not the characters. But the enjoyment. All the points before can add to or subtract from the overall enjoyment, but enjoyment is the real value, not one of the other points alone. Also enjoyment is highly subjective, so a game one person enjoys can be crap for another. That's the problem with the critic in the OP on short games and your critic on long games, they both are missing the point.

who here have a spare $1000 dollars that can be spend on a single game...... 1st call me, second just buy multiple games I am pretty sure the games will add up more than 100 hours.....