I think most just want to play more. To me, this means lower cost and shorter time. Of these two, I'd place a higher value on cost - not a huge difference between travel and playing time being 5 hours and 6 1/2 hours - both require a large block of time. The only other thing would be a prevalence of 9 hole courses and/or the ability to play 9.
Design-wise, I'd guess their preferences are as varied as the non-average golfer, so those decrying the "mindset" of designing for the average golfer, whoever that is, are a bit mistaken in their criticism.
[Just mho, as always, sorry to those (in Indiana) that I may have offended by sharing.]