From N4G:

What's up with the short games this gen?  And for $60 a pop, too.

People are willing to pay $60 for a 5-6 hour game. Development costs and times are high, so developers can reduce both by cutting content.

As long as games keep selling, developers will keep pumping out short games. 

too much focus on multi-player

With COD 1 & 2 it was more of a multiplayer experience rather than a single player one. I think alot more people will buy the game for multiplayer rather than just single player. No I'm not saying that no one will buy it for just single player but alot more for multi. If and when I do get this game the first thing I do is gonna be going online. Single player comes when my internet is down or bored. =)

Blame multiplayer--they can sink all the money into that and people will just be right there for it

Please tell me this is a joke. I loved all Call of Duty for PC. They are (IMO) the only WW2 based FPS games that feel fresh. 6 hours is not right, Doom had more than 6 hours, even the Snes Doom had more than 6 hours.
So from now on I will have to wait 2-3 years for games to come out and when they do I can finish it in a afternoon.

 .. is multiplayer a bad thing? since when? World of Warcraft definitely seems to still be selling retardedly well for online only.

What? Oh well Im not getting it then, Guess I'll be getting haze.

In b4 heavenly sword.

And your sig is huge ssj12.

For an FPS 5-6 hours isn't too bad. I can complete Half Life in about that time frame, which goes to prove that quality is better then quantity (as long as the game isn't too short).

The multiplayer will also add a huge amount of replay value.