>>7156711815 and a half hours for a $70 game is just plain abysmal, especially since it’ll never go on sale.
That said though, if they had launched at $40 I would be all for it. I’m getting to a point where I’d rather have a solid 5-10 hours of great gameplay over a 50 hours of bland gameplay with 10 hours sprinkled in of great highlights, which has sadly become the norm. Xenoblade especially is a series where you could cut half the runtime and actually improve the game by removing all the padding.
The issue is more so the price than the length. If I have to pay $70, that game better be full of content. Elden Ring launched at $60 and gave more content than any other AAA game had given in over a decade, and plenty of indie games launch with more content at a cheaper price.