I'm pretty sure Jeff has said 10000000 times, games are not to be compared to each other. That's not how this website does their reviews.
If you think 37 hours is the "bare minimum" you seriously are clueless. Patrick's feelings have been stated by tons of people on the net, do some research and grow up man, seriously... it's an OPINION, calm down
Just out of curiosity, what else does one compare games to? Movies? Books? The arbitrary and completely subjective concept of fun? Sure, in an ideal world all things would exist in a vacuum where they don't have to be judged against by the standards of their competitors and, instead, only on their own merits. But that is not realistic for a review - something that should, in theory, help consumers find and purchase products that are the best monetary value for them. In order to do that, games should be (perhaps MUST be) compared to other games in the genre. Relating information in terms of popular games in the genre will give readers a better mental image of what they can expect from the game, thus fufilling the purpose of a review. It's, like, science!
Also, just as a footnote, average review scores would seem to put Dragon's Dogma at more of a four star level, making Patrick something of an anomaly.
YOU ARE AN ANOMALY, PATRICK (please don't have your fuzz-iferous follices devour me).
I think what's actually being argued is that you shouldn't necessarily pit our reviews of products against one another, not that games shouldn't be compared. When Brad reviews Diablo III, that's Brad reviewing Diablo III, not Patrick reviewing Diablo III. So when Patrick reviews Dragon's Dogma, his opinion of Dragon's Dogma can't be compared to Brad's opinion of Diablo III -- apples to oranges. Also, stop talking in the third-person, me.