Generation 1 was the Worst Pokemon Generation

I'm really sorry I haven't had time to post much of an argument, I have been pretty busy this week. Following the rules of the debate, I can now refute my opponent's second round arguments. 1) "The Pokemon the games are terribly unoriginal." I think the opponent meant to say the pokemon in the games are terribly unoriginal. This is untrue. This game was the first pokemon game, and no pokemon created had any precedent in a previous game. Every single Pokemon was completely original to generation 1. Sure, Grimer is a pile of sludge. It is a pile of sludge that represents human pollution of the environment. [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...] It set the precedent for poison pokemon and pokemon that would later be based from human pollution. Many poison pokemon in subsequent games followed its example(I.e. Garbodor, who is a pile of...something, also representing pollution). 2) "Yes, I know these games came out the earliest,and have a good reason for being this way, but since we're comparing games side by side, no matter the release date, Generation 1's graphics were horrible compared to the rest." Graphics have no relevance to the argument. Generation 1 games were made far earlier than generation 4, which my opponent referenced, albeit with a picture, something he claimed he would rather not see in the argument. Yet a trend shows most things that were made earlier seem to be more popular. The original Parent Trap movie of 1971 [http://www.imdb.com...] scored higher on IMDB reviews than its 1998 remake http://www.imdb.com... despite worse technology. That's because its content was superior. The Beatles are considered the #1 music artist of all time by Rolling Stone, yet they had nowhere near the recording technology of today[http://www.rollingstone.com...]. The content of a piece of entertainment far outweighs any technological disadvantages. They barely matter. Generation 1 also got its graphics improved in firered and leafgreen. These are considered to be generation 3 games because of an expanded pokedex and an ability tyrade with other generation 3 games, yet in form and function they were generation 1 games, updated to fix the bugs and graphics of the original games. 3) "The storyline is catch all Pokemon and beat the champion. Oh yeah, Team Rocket does random crap too. Once again, I know this was the first game and was a bit of a rough draft, but compared to Ruby and Sapphire's conflicting teams, Sinnoh's lore, and Black and White's ending, you can see it's story also aged badly." My opponent must know that just because a Wikipedia summary of a game is longer does not mean it has a better plot. This doesn't make sense, as Wikipedia is a site that can be edited by all kinds of people. Different people probably wrote each article. One may have been an avid writer and loved poring over the details of a game. The other may have just wanted to stick to the basics. Simplicity, in the case of Pokemon games, is not a bad thing. Pokemon are primarily children's games. Overly complicating the plot can lead to alienation of the biggest consumer of the Pokemon product. This is increasingly becoming a problem. The original games were what the consumers fell in love with. Reason 4: "Competitive Battling" Sure, the original games had a few glitches. Most games in a first edition do. For instance, the Elder Scrolls: Skyrim was very glitchy. [http://www.uesp.net...] Sure, it takes a little away from the gameplay, but it doesn't make the game bad. Skyrim received a 9.5/10 from gameinformer despite its glitches. http://www.gameinformer.com... These glitches and mistakes in generation 1, though not harmful to the overall game, were fixed in firered and leafgreen. They did not detract from the game's quality. In conclusion, my opponent has not refuted that generation 1 and it's Pokemon were more popular than any other generation. They set a precedent for other generations. They were not bad, or worse than any other Pokemon game. Thank you, and back to you.