@EggsWithLegs

I think for your particular problem renting is the only solution. The problem isn't the games as much as it is your not having a strong sense of deferred gratification. Most gamers prefer replay over long generic game play. The average gamer can sustain themselves on playing a game out. They have the waste not want not philosophy close to their heart. While you on the other hand are gamings version of the fussy eater. Everyone else appreciates there is a lot left on your plate, but your just not seeing it. Since you only liked one thing on the plate.

The games you mentioned are actually rather long. Most of us can entertain ourselves by really finishing them. Most people will play through Mass Effect a number of times playing out the alternate story lines, going through other dialog options, trying to find all the secrets, and trying to level a character to perfection. The first person shooters on your list beg for casual returns, and the multiplayer components are the real gold.

@tehsage

The real litmus test is whether you will find yourself playing these games over and over again throughout the year, and in years to come. The freshness of such linear fare has a tendency to seem stagnant once you have gone through the experience. I am a fan of both series, and love many of the titles. However I have never felt a hunger to return and play them over again and again.

I played through Mario 64 all of two times, Mario Sunshine once, The Ocarina of time twice, and Twilight Princess once. I couldn't even summon the will to finish Wind Waker, or Majoras Mask. I probably will try Galaxy, but only when it is much lower in price. Based on the play I get out of such titles it is far better to not pay full price for them. Since you play them once, and then stick them on the shelf to collect dust.

most action games and games on ps3/360 seem really short. 10 hours or less is nothing. galaxy took me i think 23 hours maybe. thats a good length for an action/platformer. so then when you look at these high profile games like halo, cod4, heavenly sword that sometimes take only like 6-10 hours, its just sad. i blame metal gear solid for starting this. that seemed like the first really short highly praised game. i consider an rpg short unless its at least 40 hours. with 45-60 hours being what an rpg should be. and it seems like even rpgs these days are sometimes under 30 hours which is ridiculously short.

so yes games are too short these days. up the length or up the difficulty so you can't just coast through a 10 hour game and be done in a couple days.

Also my origanal arguement was biased against shooters. I think its a general problem with alot of games. Need for speed carbon, phantasy star universe are another two games which have fairly shortlived storylines.

I do not agree with the argument that including 50+ extras makes a game better when those extra's have no basis on the story. Assasins Creed is an example of that.

The heart of a game is the story and lately i'v been left feeling let down by the depth and length.

Going back and playing some of the older games, or watching them on youtube, I realised that most games were obscenely short. It's that one part where you get stuck that adds length. Resident Evil, Axelay, Link to the Past. The games were short. Nowadays, games are smooth cinematic experiences. You're not getting stuck as much. You're not getting frustrated. Go back and play GTA, Tomb Raider Anniversary, or Dead Rising. Long games still exist. Otherwise, sports, fighting, or puzzle games may be your only option.

 You must of skipped through most of mass effect, most people that i know it took 30-40 hours the first time, then they went back to beat it on the hardest level, and played the story an entire different way.

CoD4 my first time took about 5hours on easy, but the story was so fun i want back and played it again and again and beat most of the game on veteran now,  plus you get arcade mode after you beat it.  Then you have one of the best online games ever to hit a console, the same thing can be said for halo3,  There are people on CoD4 with over 35 days of online play.

very few people seem to remember that the entire content of an atari age game could be experienced in 30seconds to 5 minutes

and a ton of nes/mastersystem age games could be finished in an hour or two

its not length its the fun per second ratio that is important.  If this weren't true super mario bros would suck balls.

Back on the N64 Rare was the 'King' of making games that took 20+ hours to complete, 40+ hours to get everything, and had massive ammounts of multiplayer content .... They weren't alone in producing "long games" being that there were many games that were 20+ hours (and many had multiplayer content on top of that).

The truth is that single player campaigns are getting shorter, partially because shorter games require less content and are (therfore) cheaper to make, and partially because a shorter game with decent variety reviews better. 

Happy - and many games are still 20-40hrs if you want to get all the goodies. Kameo was about that long too.

Excuse me, but did you just say there is nothing new, gameplaywise, in Gears of War?