We're not in that age, and it's clear that Edge won that competition as they're one of the few outlets left that still charge for their content.
That is a very long time, most games especially those not in the RPG genre don't take that long to beat. If you're grinding it out with a game you don't enjoy it can feel like longer. From all I know of how game reviewers get paid, it's not hourly either.
He has sat through many games, no doubt many he didn't like. This one particularly gave him problems, and he bowed out of submitting a review for it even though that likely hurt him financially. Being a reviewer is not like being a mechanic, it's more akin to being a writer. GRRM could force himself to sit down and complete TWOW, but would it be something that he would be satisfied giving to his readers?
And their job is not like many other jobs, and doesn't operate under the same rules. Judging it by the standards of standard fair jobs is petty and uneducated, as if game reviewers even make good money.
Nothing lazy about what he did. He sunk over 30 hours into it, then decided he wasn't the right guy to review the game for Edge. He likely lost money from that choice, whereas he could have rushed through the rest to complete it and churn out a review, but that would be a disservice to his profession. Nothing was hinging on him completing the review, he's not out here doing a half-assed job repairing a car that's going to break down on that customer again.
To treat game reviews like car reviews is to not treat games as art. Roger Ebert walked out of movies and still reviewed them, despite their much shorter on average length. Nathan Brown wasn't afforded the opportunity to do the same, to review the game without finishing, even though that would be a true reflection of how he felt about the game : too much of a slog to complete.
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jonathan-livingston-seagull-1973