An Objectively Better Game; Is it Possible?

[Koh]

This is something I've been giving a lot of thought to lately, and I think I've finally come up with my own answer.

Overall, the quality of a game is a subjective matter. No matter what one person thinks, there are other people who think the opposite, or at least slightly different.

The PURPOSE of a game is an objective matter; they're (in business practice) to make money.

So, if a game series is changed somehow, to sell more units, is it objectively or subjectively better?

My answer to this question is it's objectively better. There may be people who don't like said changes to the series, however, if the main purpose of games (in business practice) is to make money, and more money is being made, then you can't argue that the games are worse on that level, because they've done their purpose of raking in more money.

I offer this as an example: Pokemon turning into a more open game, rather than the linear games they have been. Naturally, since people love to explore and have a bit more control over their story, it's only plausible that it'd sell more units. Does this mean that it's a subjective change, because not everyone really wants an open world, or objective, because they've done their job in selling more units? My answer is it's objectively better.

What are your thoughts?