So I see it as both an indicator of good work and a positive thing.
Yes, other's believe that Easter eggs are bad I assume you're referring to the famous http://blogs.msdn.com/b/larryosterman/archive/2005/10/21/483...
It has good points but I believe it to be wrong in conclusion, there's lots of real issues to care about before this one.
Excel 95 had a "Doom"-like 3D game. Excel 97 had a basic flight simulator. These were fun and weren't buggy, but here's the problem:
How much time do you think was lost in classrooms in particular after all the kids discovered there were games they could be playing instead of working? All of the built in Windows games were removed, and Flash/Java weren't installed. But you cannot remove these if you need Excel.
This was a legitimate issue in the 1990s. So much so that the school I attended gave anyone detention caught playing these games during class time(!). Yet every class there would be someone sitting in the corner playing away.
That's exactly the opposite of what I said, I said I liked Easter Eggs in principle but then gave an example of when they went wrong. The first line of my comment was: "I agree with Easter Eggs in products."
Easter Eggs are good, you just really have to consider the impact they're going to have (in terms of perception, usages, and bugs).
However it is unfortunate that they decided to conflate a product needed in a classroom (namely the Office suite) and a feature which is not (namely a game).
Microsoft's only responsibility is that their software is fit for purpose, and in this scenario it is not.
edit: 4 people downvoted, not a single reply? This place is turning into Reddit. Pathetic behaviour.