Excellent points, Bill. Obviously, with something like this, I knew there would be a great diversity of opinions--indeed, my motive was to hopefully spark some good discussion! :-)

However, in continuing the Tetris debate, I'd like to separate the "Greatest Game" definition from the "Most Popular" or even "Most Successful" definition. No one would argue that Tetris isn't a tremendously popular and successful game, probably edging out even greats like Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, Galaga, or even Super Mario Bros. for sheer numbers of people who have enjoyed and continue to enjoy them. Game developers like to hold it up (almost a knee-jerk reaction) when discussing innovation and simple games that are nevertheless fun and engaging.

Still, there are lots of very popular movies that no serious critic really calls "great." I'm sure Louis Lamour or Danielle Steele novels have probably sold more copies than someone like Norman Mailer or possibly even classics like the Iliad and the Odyssey, but, really, no one can seriously hold them up as great works. Tic-Tac-Toe (or naughts and crosses) is a very popular game that almost everyone has enjoyed at some point, but to call it great?

As I indicated in my review, for a game to be "great," it must inspire the player far beyond just the simple desire to accumulate points. The game should actually change the player into something better than he was when before he played the game. In other words, the game is not just a distraction or a pastime, but really, a life-changing event. I can think of only a very few games that have even come close to this for me. Since so many game developers are only interested in "wide appeal," as you say, they tend to neglect or ignore the greater possibilities of the genre and just go for volume. One thing about Elite was that the developers specifically did NOT cater to the lowest common denominator--one fact that undoubtedly adds to its greatness.