Sorry for such a late reply. I’ve been busy with some other things that I needed to straighten out and thus haven’t had much time to view previous articles that I have written.

Your argument for the merit of Pokémon seems valid and sound, and its validity demonstrates one of the points that I inadvertently implied with my article: that games that one normally would not consider as “great” actually can be considered in this manner. Too often, the gaming community as a whole is hyper-critical and exclusive when recognizing well-made titles. I wanted this article to contribute to an expanding dialogue about the evolution and importance of all genres of games (including the sports ones).

But, if I may interject, if you’re looking at the criteria of innovation and consistent quality is Pokemon.

Now here me out, I’m not saying that Pokemon is my favourite series – or even close to it for that matter – but the series has constantly innovated and maintained a constant slot in quality. (Up to you to decide what that quality is)

First of all you had the first generation gameboy games, which were undeniably a success. They were innovative for being really the first Gameboy games to utilise linking systems together effectively and to have this benefit gameplay. And as the series on the Gameboys went on, each addition contained new areas, new items, new characters and new Pokemon.

Meanwhile the series continued on the N64, with titles like Pokemon Snap and Pokemon Stadium. Additions which – again – brought innovation and the same quality as you’d come to expect.

So, logically the greatest series ever is Pokemon. :/ I’m not sure if this is a good thing really… The scientific method of doing this doesn’t seem to be working.

*Buries post under Indian burial ground, whistles nonchalantly and walks off*