The developer of Hellblade 2 has explained why it prefers making shorter games, insisting digital distribution has opened the door “to games of all shapes and sizes.”
But I especially like great short games. I don't want to spend 100+ hours just to complete a campaign with every other game.
Something more linear with cool set pieces you can be done with after 10 - 20 hours is nice. And, though I hate to toot Microsoft's horn, Game Pass is the ideal format for such games in my opinion.
It depends. 6 hours of an amazing story that I know I'll replay? Sure. 6 hours of the same boring gameplay over and over? Meh.
Halo Infinites campaign was juuuuust fun enough to be okay with how short it was. My buddy and I got the map 100% in just about 8 hours. It was fun, but we were annoyed it was already over.
Sure if it's 15 bucks, a 6 hours game is fine. Else I could use that money to buy games that are much longer and cost the same and bring me the same enjoyment. I've played enough games to tell you that no game exists, that is so much better, to justify 70€ for a 6 hours game. Not even something like Portal.
More and more I've tossed away games(metaphorically) for being too long. With everything being an open world with RPG elements now... it just takes too long to get through these games these days...
I think it also depends on the demographic of the game. As a kid I had no issues dropping 4+ hours a day on a game. That doesn't work for adults. And being "stuck" on the same story for months can be frustrating, because other great games will be bound to come out in that time. BG3 is a good example. Great game. But I'm already eyeing my next games and after 50 hours I'm just about halfway through and some parts start to feel like a chore.