What do you think of the game's length?

[serotonin]

Basically, anyone —yes, anyone, even mainstream reviewers— who thinks that a game must be long in order to have some sort of value, is a moron. A game, like a song or a movie, should last until there isn't anything meaningful to add. Everything else is a filler and it would taint the work, trivializing it instead of improving it.

Nevermind your obnoxiously righteous attitude, this assertion of yours is silly.

"A game, like a song or a movie, should last until there isn't anything meaningful to add."

That's true enough, and I fully agree on this point, but this

"Basically, anyone —yes, anyone, even mainstream reviewers— who thinks that a game must be long in order to have some sort of value, is a moron."

is a stupid thing to say.

Declaring unequivocally, as you have, that length is irrelevant in deciding the fairness of price, is itself the assertion of a 'moron'.

For example... if a game is 3 hours long, I don't care how high quality that 3-hour experience is, that doesn't justify a 60 dollar price-tag.

You mention movies and songs... would you pay 10 bucks to see a 'movie' in a theater that's 30 minutes long? Would you pay full price for a CD with 5 tracks that last 1 minute each? Of course not.


(btw, just to clarify, I'm not criticizing Amnesia's price in relation to its length, which is entirely a good value... I'm making a larger point here)