Is a single playthrough game length the only metric of monetary value for you? What if, hypothetically, The Wonderful 101 draws parallels to Bayonetta in game design? As in, the combat system is deceptively deep, and the game designed as a whole to throw the player in tightly constructed, fast paced, highly varied encounters. And then, based on a multitude of unlockables, you're encouraged to play through the experience again, master your skills, master new equipment, and discover different ways to conquer your foes?
I ask this because the action brawler genre is generally very much like this: short, highly replayable. And they don't require less work than any other title three or four times as long. These are games where the development time of design, testing, and polish is spent on second-to-second gameplay, where every moment is as meticulously and brilliantly constructed as possible.
Value is relative of course, so I can totally appreciate people who just prefer longer games to feel they've got their money's worth. But I also think this genre is a rough one to criticise when it comes to length. Kind of like a fighting game, to a certain extent. Most of those have single player options that can be breezed through in one or two sittings. But people stick around for the unlockables, the multiplayer, and mastering the very tightly designed combat system. That's where the game length is. Not in a single player adventure, but the mastering of mechanics.
