The point is that it's valuable for game developers to realize that some people can't play a game that requires javascript. The comment helped facilitate that.
Everyone can plan a game that requires javascript. A vanishingly small number of people actually wont. Reading anything more into this single comment is silly.
From your comments you seem to actually be interested, so let me tell you about it from my neo-luddite POV.
I love games ( I actually _pay_ for games I like ). I also run with my browser fairly locked down. If you've made a game like this and want me to take more than 10 seconds on the web page, at the bare minimum have it load _something_ without scripts and without requesting anything from another domain ( this means jquery, google apis etc )
This game is a great example of one I wouldn't look at because it loads nothing until a request to googleapis is enabled and scripting is turned on. Perhaps it is overly judgemental on my part, but I assume that failing to provide _any_ level of graceful degradation in a design indicates a poor effort. It takes 5 minutes to add this to your landing page and will save you a tiny percentage of bounces.
tldr: make sure your landing page loads something. anything. Ideally a short message telling users what awesome things enabling the site scripting does for us.
I don't know if that's necessary here. How is someone supposed to get to this page without knowing it's a game? And if someone that turned off javascript doesn't expect that a game might need code, well, I'll have more fun laughing as the door hits them on the way out than I would having 0.1% more traffic.
(I would agree with you if there is some significant flow of visitors that don't already know it's a game, but not until then.)
"And if someone that turned off javascript doesn't expect that a game might need code, well, I'll have more fun laughing as the door hits them on the way out"
Have you ever heard of games that don't run within web browsers?
That's what I thought this particular game might be.
In fact, there is a slew of standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], and Inform7[3] out there that this particular game might have been written in. And I would have had no problem playing it then.
It is a web based game and uses Javascript, there isn't anything specifically wrong with that. Why is it objectively superior to have distributable binaries that have to be compiled or ported for each architecture and OS? What is the fundamental advantage here?
Honestly, aside from not making a point in your initial comment you chose to make it in an unnecessarily snarky manner. Completely uninteresting and irrelevant to someone saying "hey check out my game". If you don't want to check it out, then don't, it isn't necessary to share that non-information with the rest of us.
I'm sure most of us (as I can see from the extended comments on this here) would have been more than happy to have a reasonable discussion on the pros and cons of browser based distribution of applications if you had started there instead of where you did.
"That's what I thought this particular game might be."
Well, you were wrong. This is a great game BTW. I'm hooked. Turn on JS and enjoy, or go play with what allow yourself.
Game developers should learn that Amish people exist, at which point they're aware that all computer-related things will have people who choose to not them. They'll also learn that it's not a big deal.