Budgets aren't everything, see: every transformers movie...oh yeah and that Cyberpunk game that's still being patched.
Since you are having trouble understanding, I will explain it thoroughly
Budget is not everything. It is just
a metric. A much more reliable one than a 'gameplay time' metric, which you mentioned.
When comparing things, you need objective values:
I can't compare 3 games saying one has 30 hour gameplay time the other had a 10 million budget, and the last one got an 8 in most reviews.
What I need to do is to choose the same metric to compare the 3 games. Gameplay time against gameplay time, budget against budget, review against review
So, which metric should we use? The most reliable one.
Which games are
more likely to be better? A longer game, a high budget, or a highly reviewed game?
Probably the one that had the highest reviews. (don't cherrypick an outlier, that would be stupid and/or dishonest)
BUT WAIT! This game is not currently released. So, no reviews.
Then, which one is the next best metric to compare games?
Of course the budget! Gameplay time is BS, because grindy mechanics would be king if we chose to compare games using this metric. I'd rather play a good but smaller game than a longer but boring one.
I can't make myself any clearer than this. You may disagree, and that's perfectly fine. But at least, I hope you can finally understand my argument.