Game Length, Value & Replayability

[JEMC]

MikeRox said:
Do you go watch a 3 and a half hour movie rather than a 2 hour movie at the cinema because the ticket price is the same?

I'd rather have a shorter game that I want to see to the end/play over and over again than a game I'm willing to end and that will never be touched again after that.

That's a good point, but the contrary can also be said. If every movie were 3.5 hours long and fun, why would you want to see a movie that's only 2 hours long? And that's what happens with games, if the competition makes the same games but longer, the other publishers counterattack doing the same thing.

Now, if the games have the same quality, then this is perfect for us as we get more game, experiences, etc for the same money. The problem is when that extra time is because of boring side-quests that do more harm than good, or even worse, when they add side-quests that make the main game look boring and unappealing.

Personally, I don't want +100 hours games as I get bored long before that, but I don't want 4h games either as I feel ripped off.

Rage has been one of the latest games to make me feel that way, it ends way too soon and too abruptly leaving (at least me) with a bad taste in your mouth. And yet, a game like Renegade Ops has given me many more hours of pure fun thanks to its replayability and different characters/vehicles. But of course, each genres deals with replayability and duration on its own way.