Developing angry birds whilst considerably simpler than Call of Duty is not that simple.
At a minimum you have to implement smoothly scrolling graphics and quite a lot of physics. Of course there are libraries available which help with these things but then you have a lot of documentation to read (if it even exists).
I believe angry birds cost in the region of $100,000 to develop. Not really a learning exercise for a child.
Sure, but I'd imagine the bulk of that is spent on things that don't really matter in the context of kids making a game for themselves.
How much of that cost comes from sound, fairly slick graphics and animation, and the iterative polish needed to make a good game into a great one. I suspect that those things account for the bulk of the development cost.
The standards of polish for a hit game are far removed from what matters for getting kids into programming. The past generations making their text adventures didn't, for the most part, need to match the quality of Zork, and the current generation doesn't need to match Angry Birds. The point is to get them far enough that they could make something kinda sorta like it.
I'd be hard for a kid to make "Angry Birds" because of the block tumbling/collision physics. From experience, though, simple platformers, tank games and tron clones are within the reach of children with minimal instruction. A language/environment designed for that sort of thing helps a lot, though. We used QBasic, I'm not sure what you'd use these days.
At a minimum you have to implement smoothly scrolling graphics and quite a lot of physics. Of course there are libraries available which help with these things but then you have a lot of documentation to read (if it even exists).
I believe angry birds cost in the region of $100,000 to develop. Not really a learning exercise for a child.