Money vs. time isn't a good way to judge the value of a game at all. I can buy a deck of playing cards for $2 and play a thousand hours of it. I started speedrunning an old NES game last year and I put in hundreds of hours in a game that you can buy used at a flea market for < $5. You can go outside and play with sticks and dirt for the rest of your life for free if you want.

You can pay $60 for Guild Wars 2 and play it forever for free. Why play any other MMO, especially ones with subscription fees? Why do WOW or FFXIV exist? I put 750 hours into GW2 before I got sick of it. So why buy or play any other game at all, ever?

I can buy a Super Bowl ticket for $3000 and get a few hours of entertainment; is that worth it? Why does anyone play golf when it costs huge money for clubs and course time, when you can play frisbee for almost free?

It's because there's much more to a game than that. Gamers aren't really looking to maximize money vs. time, or else they wouldn't be playing video games at all. Video games are an expensive hobby compared to many, when you add up console/PC cost + accessories + game cost. I bet $30 vs $60 is barely a blip on the radar if you look at your lifetime spending on games.

Some kinds of video games cost a fortune to make. I watched a few hours of The Order 1886 and it looks really impressive graphically. All of that voice acting and motion capture and art design can't have been cheap. I imagine that has a lot to do with the price tag. Does that mean I want to spend $60 on it? Maybe not for me, I think it's a bit silly to spend that much money to produce this kind of game if it doesn't add a lot to the gameplay. But many people (myself included) are definitely impressed by graphics and physics and immersive games, or else why aren't we all still playing PS2 instead of PS4? Those things do have value to us. Everyone can decide where to draw the line of worth it / not worth it for themselves.

When I buy a game, I ask myself if it offers something that I enjoy that I can't get anywhere else. Sometimes that means $15 for a game that I beat in < 3 hours. Take The Swapper for example; it's a very short puzzle game, but I really enjoyed it because the art style was so unique (hand-crafted clay models), the puzzle mechanic was very fun and interesting, and the plot offered a lot of things to think about. I'll never play it again, because puzzle games don't offer a lot of replayability, but I felt like I got my money worth. It won lots of awards. And this game has approximately the same money-to-time ratio as The Order 1886.

Does the Order 1886 offer you something unique that you can't get elsewhere? The graphics? The setting or the story? The gameplay? The total package? If so, buy it and be happy; if not, don't buy it and be happy. Playtime is waaaaaaay down on my list of priorities.