Does size matter?

Well, I think everything you pay for should have its value based on different factors.

For instance, if you buy this game, have some fun, but it's really short, that would be something for me which lowers its value. I would rather spend that money on something else. Another good example for this would probably be League of Legends. Yes, it's free, but I spent 70 € for in game stuff. However, I played it for roughly 3000 hours. See this in relation to people who buy a new 60 bucks game and play it for like 30 hours.

This does not only work for games, I just think about my watch, which I own for quite a time, but I use it everyday and therefore it justifies the price I paid.

Yes, but it's one factor of many, and I would be willing to pay more for a short but sweet game than a long & padded one. A 4h game that is consistently fun is better than a 20h game where only 10h were fun.
But at some point a game might end up feeling like it does not have enough content compared to its price point. This is all in comparison to other games. Other similar games might have the same consistently high quality through the entire game, but offer more of this quality content, at the same price point.

I believe one of portal's criticisms was its length.

It's all about the girth of the disk.

It depends on price, and other factors

Ffs, but you didn't even buy it for the full price. xD I really liked this game. It was too short, too easy, and without a phantasmagorical ending, but I loved the storyline, the dialogues and monologues, the scenery, the characters, everything! :D I also don't like small games, but it's not like you bought it for its full price. xD

No. You know the price and it's easy to know the approximate length. If you decide to for it you shouldn't downvote, write a bad review or even worse ask for a refund because of length.

Length is important somewhat. But using padding tactics such as collectibles and just control c + v the content isnt okay.

I loved papo & yo even though it took me 4 hours to beat. But only because it touches a issue that I am familiar with. I wouldnt recommend to others for just its gameplay on a high price.

Some games who are too long start to become a drag, which makes me more upset than if it was short. Its a delicate balance.

Left me with feeling mixed about the game and since that isn't an option, i gave it a negative (if a price drop will ever happen to it being more reasonable i would definitely change it to positive).

I think it is entirely appropriate to factor the price paid into a review of a game, especially a user review. I would agree that $13 is way too much for an hour-long game (unless it is among the best games ever made). So I commend you for your review, you are helping your fellow game consumers.

You need to know how to use it ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Does it feel rushed ?
no ? that's ok

There are a lot of "time-fillers" ? (useless backtracing, repetitive quests, collect X items because of reasons™)
If the answer is "yes" maybe shorter was better, isn't it ?

Anyway it's subjective

Yes, I would, in certain circumstances.

If I knew going in that the game has little content compared to its price, and there were no major cons during the game (like uncooperative controls, missing sprites, botched story), I wouldn't downvote it.
However, if the game's description and store page let me assume there was something more to the game and then it ended up being way shorter/thinner in content while otherwise amazing, I would downvote. Same goes if there are some flaws to the game.

For a game to be pricey and short, it needs to be exceptional in what it tries to do.

In case of The Little Acre, which I have wishlisted, I know it's not going to be 20+ hours of fun. Based on how it looks and what I've heard about it, it is a great game. If and when I get to play it (assuming there's no significant price cut before then), I'll probably comment on the length vs. price, but it wouldn't (won't) be the reason I give it thumbs down. As of now, I think it's too pricey for its content but for the visuals alone almost worth it. Almost, so I'm still waiting to buy it.

This pretty much explains it ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Jokes aside, I use the 1 dollar 1 hour rule, because for me it's really about the price. I first heard about it from Spoole, some guy who wears hat.
Read more about the rule here, if you want. I'm not good at explaining shit.

I already gave my vote. I thought this was on a HDD perspective. I have a lot of games on steam that need above 20GB HDD. I don't install those =( I need a new computer. But it seems it's the trend right now. Fighting games needing 70GB on hard drive, what?!
For RPGs I would understand, but Fighting genre?! (I'm looking at you DC games).

i like long ones, especially if there's some character progression like rpg elements.

but short isn't bad if it's packed with lots of content and/or something original. quantum break was pretty short but still awesome, and it had some room to replay so it's ok.

Short length is often a plus. Guess if I shelled out sixty bucks blindly and it ended up being a 60 minute thing I'd be a bit salty but I don't see that happening.

A longer game isn't a better game, and a 3 hour game can be worth more than a sprawling 120 hour game.
However, longer games tend to be worth more.
So... it's complicated?

Well you know how it is... It could be the best thing you would've experienced in your entire life, but not lasting more than few minutes/seconds. How much would you pay to experience that?

Yes... size matters!

View attached image.

It depends on the price. If it's a REALLY REALLY good game. I can let it get away with an up to $2 per hour ratio. If it's a regular quality game. I expect the average of 50¢ per hour that is the norm of quality indie titles.

Well Reviews should be based on your experiance.
That being said if you did not bought on full Price you should not downvote it for the Full Price to game length Ratio because that is not your experiance, it is only your opinion.
Nothing against stating that in your Review but your voting should be based on your own experiance an not at a experiance you never made.

Quality over quantity!

i paid full price for Superhot, Abzu, Virginia and others. and while they were pretty short, they were also very unique, very enjoyable and in my opinion absolutely worth the money. i don't need games that are 100h long, but have 90h filler content. i prefer games that are special in some way. and many of those special games are also quite short. and that's absolutely fine. Virginia was 1.5-2h, if i recall correctly. but it was fucking intense. and after i beat it, i sat in front of my pc for like an hour and googled what others think about the game and how they interpret the story. that is a sign of a really good game. if you keep thinking about it. this is what makes me think this experience was easily worth the money.

What KillingArts said:

Quality over quantity!

I don't like when game is long because of constant backtracking/repetitive missions. But I also don't like when game is short and gives me that feeling that it was cut in half/ended rapidly (like when author run out of time/money).