Is longer really better? by Riley Hart

I've seen a lot of discussion about book length recently. Most of it seems to steer toward, "longer, longer, longer!" I feel like the odd man out because though I don't read a lot of short stories or novellas, I don't typically like really long books. If it's paranormal or fantasy or something that's one thing. We have world-building there so you need more words. Even in romantic suspense, because there's a case to solve, a bad guy to catch, or someone trying to kill the MC, but for contemporary romance, I struggle with books that are too long. Those are the books I tend to DNF because I get bored, the plot sags. I can love a character, but I also can't just read about anything and everything they do if it doesn't move the plot forward. Books that feel too long to me start to make me lose interest (that doesn't mean they ARE too long because hey, this is just my preference).

Also, that's not to say I feel every book should be around the same word count because all books are different, but as a general rule, I don't read really long contemporary romance.

When I'm writing, my "hot spot" is usually around 70k. That works for me. That doesn't mean it works for everyone.

And sometimes, I do want a good novella. It's nice to read something in one sitting. In fact, I have a novella or two planned in the near future.

What are your thoughts on length? Bigger the better?