I disagree actually. The game was short, yes. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Portal was 3 hours at best, and I still regard it as one of the best games ever made because imo it was very innovative (the concept has been fucked around with before, but never presented with such depth as a main feature), played well, and the art added to the experience.
The mechanics being "glitchy" is a very weird claim to me, because I had 0 problems and everything worked really well and as expected. If you're referring to the whole game not being as "fluid" as it should be - well, it couldn't have been without being stupidly linear. In some of the levels you really had to look around and plan, which added to the experience (as opposed to it being a boring "corridor" runner) imo.
The combat... well, it wasn't CoD, that's for sure. It had its quirks, but considering that the main feature of the game is running, holding a gun was more of an afterthought they could've entirely done without, but chose to include. I don't mind it personally... and it was more than playable for me, I didn't even see a problem with it before I came online and started reading all the whining.
I actually dug the story. It was somewhat simplistic, but it pieced the levels and everything together, as opposed to it being a series of platforming challenges.
ME was not a fps, nor did it claim to be. I see it as somewhat of a platforming game - something like Prince of Persia without the magic in first person.
I really like "futuristic" themes and the artstyle, and the mechanics worked flawlessly for me. Honestly, never in the game did I stop and be like "this control is shit" or "I can't shoot this guy" or something.
Of course, there was substantial trial and error in some parts (one scene comes to mind), but that comes with all platforming/slightly puzzle games imo.
Overall, the bottom line is I really liked it - for what it is, even though it's no HL2.
:
