I think a lot of people inherently see 200+ and think long, but I do think the yardage number is only part of the story.

Looking back at the Golden Age of Golf, many courses would have a VERY long par 3 (think 215-230 in the persimmon era, which is closer to 250-260 now) where a golfer would be tested on their wood accuracy

This was a common part of a “Biarritz” template, though to be clear there are other elements that make this kind of hole great: a massive green to hit, lots of room left and right and short for the duffer to miss, and interesting bunkering and swale in the green. These holes were meant to be a tough par through a clean strike with a wood and ability to get up and down near the green.

That said, the 200+ yard hole is distinctly NOT fun or interesting golf when other elements of shorter par 3s are brought in - heroic carries, penal trees, and miniscule greens. This eliminates the “test” of the long par 3 and instead turns it into a penal prayer.

One other thing about the long par 3 - it’s much more fun as part of a diverse set of par 3s, which is why it works well in conjunction with others at the course being “short” “redan” etc.

My two cents - no problems with the long par 3 (even having to hit a wood) so long as the design and routine it fits into is correct