c'mon wright, you should know better.

the impressions were based on demos of specific points in the game. Also the people I am referrencing were playing the final version of the game, some things may have been cleaned up from the demo build. Again, the only negatives I have seen in impressions of people playing the actual game are its length and some people were not keen on the ending (no idea why, as I am going to wait to find out for myself this weekend)

Not everyone likes multiplayer.  I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

I play the multiplayer on about 1 out of 10 games I buy that has it.  I buy games for the single player content.  All this happened with Heavenly Sword was one of the first big PS3 releases and got trashed on for being too short.  I freaking loved that game.  I'm so pissed at myself for trading it back in.  I went through it 3 times, and would've more if it had trophy support.  

Multiplayer games get a pass for any arguement that has game length in it, even if you're just doing the exact same thing (deathmatch, team deathmatch, CTF) over and over.  I would feel like I saw all the content in Evolve after an hour.  But that's just my opinion.

When games started to cost 70 euros here. If its that expensive, it better deliver in value.

With that said, it depends on the game and how much of a replay value it has.

You were just not looking hard enough and didn't see the hate.

This is the console wars. Every exclusive is hated. Lol!

You make an assumption that it is fun. That isn't known yet and won't be till you play it, if you give it the chance. With a shorter campaign the chance I'll give it will be less because it might not be fun, or have replayability. Although, if it ends up being fun and a game you can play through a bunch of times then it's well worth it which is partly where the Castlevania refrence comes in I would assume, I haven't played IV but the others I have I have quite enjoyed and can go back and play them again and again. The same can be said for many short games like pretty much every Contra, Punch Out and many old school side scrollers. 

It is undeniable that as games did get longer it has created a new expectation for games though, one that has be created by the developers and gamers alike. For a single player game now days, 5 hours is quite short (of course that's a speed run) but we still have no idea about how good or fun it is. 

I agree though, there are times when some games are too long, but that's mostly due to them not being good enough to make up for the length. If a game is great, even though I don't have a huge amount of time for gaming like I did when I was young, I will continue to pick it up and finish it but it will be over a much longer time period than when I was a kid, but I will likely put the same amount of time into the game. The part that sucks now is that I have more money to buy more, but less time to put into games so I am going to be choosier. 

The snap judgement is annoying though. 

Well my argument is minimum amount of length for $60 and not like what games should cost/hour. And the production values also fall in the same argument as "other games also offer the same if not higher production value but still has longer length" sorta deal. And I am not even talking about rpgs, I am talking about other shooters that cost $60 but offer a longer experience. Heck, shooters that even have online offer a longer experience like Uncharted and The Last of Us which not only have high production value but also has longer length.

And putting a value on size is just nonsense since most of it is just uncompressed textures and videos and etc

Again, production values dont really matter cause of what I said before. And most likely, judging from the videos I have seen, this is certainly not going to be the best $60 game on the planet in other aspects apart from the length so the length does matter for a single player only game specially like this. And I think MGS GZ should be offered for free or less than $10 at best cause it is exploitative charging that much for an hour cause they knew that the fans would eat it up

And Black Bars annoy me a lot but I wont get into that again after the last lengthy conversation

I don't want to spend 60 in a game to play it once in 5 hours, there are better options. The thing is, is all a combination of elements, when one is lacking the other should excel, if the game is short and lacks deployability it should have a Devine fun factor to be satisfying and in the case of the Order, is obvious is not that level of fun.

Because most people got the gmae in an indie bundle for $2-3 >_>