Am I doing the right thing by sacrificing more games for more intensity?

As a pitifully low rated player, I am but an infant in the world of chess and am still trying to get my bearings and find the most efficient ways to improve.

I used to play a lot of bullet chess and fast blitz, but after reading about how that can lead you to plateau, I have become paranoid and only play >10 minute games (which are admittedly still short but are the longest that can fit into my schedule).

The problem is, I don’t play as many games as I used to, because the games I play now take longer and don’t fit in around the edges of my life anymore. I still briefly analyze every game using the chess.com ‘quick analysis’ function, do tactics every day, and watch instructive YouTube videos, but I feel as if I am not following the best path to success. What can I do to improve my routine and get better?
Thanks in advance...

The quick analysis function doesn't do anything except for being colorful. It shows different results each time you analyze the same game. 

Huh. What should I use instead?

The basic analysis on another site, slightly better. I'm not supposed to advertise other websites, though. 

Or you can simply download stock fish and use that to show you the best moves. 

"..., you have to make a decision: have tons of fun playing blitz (without learning much), or be serious and play with longer time controls so you can actually think.

One isn't better than another. Having fun playing bullet is great stuff, while 3-0 and 5-0 are also ways to get your pulse pounding and blood pressure leaping off the charts. But will you become a good player? Most likely not.

Of course, you can do both (long and fast games), ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (June 9, 2016)

https://www.chess.com/article/view/longer-time-controls-are-more-instructive

 

One way is to grill yourself in tactics and pattern recognition. Play should improve afterwards.

You are supposed to analyze the game by yourself first.  Quick analysis doesn't teach you the skill of analyzing your own games, it teaches you how to be lazy.  I know it takes a long time to really go over your own games and write notes about every single move.  It takes me about 5-10 hours to cover just about 15 games, which is about what I will play before I start to go back and analyze the games.  It's a long chore.  It cannot be substituted.  You either will do it or you won't, and if you won't, then you won't improve.  Sad truth.  If you don't have time to do it, I suggest you only play for fun and leave the big ratings to the people who have the time to get to those ratings.  I myself am struggling to get to about 2000 rating.  I know it's going to take a lot of consistent effort, and up until now, I haven't been very consistent.  

 

As someone else said, you should do a mixture of fast and slow games.  That's the only way to do it.  Short games for opening practice, and slow games for teaching yourself how to calculate properly.  A lot of people like to say don't study openings at all and just study endgames, but I believe they are only preaching to the choir.  You need to study all phases of the game to get good, the very master they quote to spread their propaganda even said the same thing, study all phases of the game.

 

I write to tell you to analyze your own games, 9by yourself, don't let a computer do it, unless you let it do it after you finish analyzing it yourself) and yes, play long games, as I am doing now, before I wasn't, which is why I haven't improved much over the years.  And, don't listen to everything everybody says here.  Do your research.  A lot of people here like to say don't study openings at all, and a lot of people believe them because they have high ratings.  I don't agree with it, doesn't make me right, but I know of a lot of masters who agree, that to just study endgames, and not study openings, is not optimal for improvement.  Why?  Read Garry Kasparov's Book to find out.

Slower games are better learning experiences for sure even if you don't play as much. Bullet and Blitz aren't the best to practice in even if you do end up playing more games.

To answer your question, yes, you are doing the right thing.