The old adage, "if you don't have anything nice, then don't say anything at all," seems applicable here. Most of the posters have used it as argument against the OP since he has nothing nice to say about this homebrew game. However, that same argument can be used to support his opinion.
The spirit of the original post was that most good homebrew games have a majority of effort in the programming, or design of the game itself regardless of the publishing costs. Publishing costs are the same no matter how good or bad the homebrew software is. So, just because a game costs $50 to produce and you sell it for $70, doesn't mean your game is worth $70 if it sucks. It doesn't even mean it's worth $50 because it cost $50 to produce. Chicken Shoot for the Wii cost $30 when it came out, and it definitely wasn't worth that, right? A re-skin of an old game that was never good in the first place does not add anything to the conversation and is better left unsaid. Let's be honest, the Smurf game for Colecovision had to be, possibly, one of the worst games ever made, period. Re-skinning it, reproducing carts and charging money for it amounts to not much more than a money grab for a little money above the effort for the publishing of the material. Profit which you are absolutely entitled to. But, don't expect to re-program ET with a new hat, call it Indiana Jones, and not get a lot of negative opinions on your "creativity".
In 2014, we've come to expect a modicum of quality and innovation in the homebrew community. Original IP's, innovative programming and original titles add value to the library of existing titles and compliment the library of original classic games, not just add to the mediocrity that made up most of the libraries' hundreds of titles. Good, new titles are worth premium prices, the rest belong in a landfill.