I didn't want to get into that as it's not the main point, but I think it's a good example of how a series is clearly designed for a new generation of young players each time, not appealing to veterans (e.g. very basic, unskippable tutorials and explanations every time, dialogue and plots aimed at ten-year-olds) yet still manages to have a continuing adult fanbase. The regions being different is probably the best argument, I don't think there's enough characterisation to really say the games have distinct characters. But this is an outsider looking in of course.Digimon Adventure 2020, which ended a couple of weeks ago, is a reboot of the 1999 Digimon Adventure. How bad it was is debatable but there's a consensus that it was worse than the original.
I don't see what problem @Thande has with the Pokémon games. While the game play is the same, the characters and regions are usually different.
A good point, and I discuss an example of this in a later article in this series.Reboots would seem to have fallen out of fashion recently, at least in Hollywood, probably because some recent examples have ended by being poorly received. The trends these days are either to do a soft reboot, or, most recently what has been described as a "requel", where part but not all of the original franchise is acknowledged (for example, the most recent Terminator film not acknowledging anything after Terminator 2).
This allows the new work to distance itself from the old without having to take the inevitably controversial move of jettisoning everything, as in a traditional reboot. In fact, it can be a selling point to hardcore fans who would otherwise hate the idea of a reboot ("Remember how that film you loved got ruined by all those crappy sequels? None of that happened anymore, this is the REAL sequel").