Sorry, we just don't allow questions that ask for lists of games, no matter how small or big said list is. Wikipedia already does lists far better than we could ever hope to and I suggest you check this page instead:
The main reason we don't do lists is that we have a proven track record of being crap at maintaining them. Unlike Wikipedia, this site isn't organised as a dictionary of topic-explanation entries, but as list of question-answers pairs. These questions don't need multiple answers. These questions need instead a clear unique and easily referenceable identifier for ease of updating.
These questions in short are a poor fit for our engine and our audience. This is why we voted then to be off topic two years ago now. I'm happy to reconsider, but it will take more than one casualty for me to reopen a can of worms that took six months to resolve only to repopulate the shore with rotting outdated lists that are already on Wikipedia to begin with.
Objectivity has very little to do with this problem. Game catalogues are objective almost by definition, as they would be game recommendation questions otherwise. This doesn't save them. The problem of quality remains — and it's a problem that trascends a single answer posted two years ago and that is still up to date through mostly a stroke of luck.
See, the underlying question here is this: Why was your question only closed now for a policy that changed two years ago? Because it slipped under the radar. For two years we failed to look at your question and say, oh dear it needs to be updated (as in, closed). This whole question is a testament to how terribad we are at lists and fighting information rot in general. The only reason the answer is still up to date is because no new games have released in the past two years. That is honestly awful.
The whole point of Stack Exchange is to do one thing (q&a) and do it well. Lists of game is not that thing, add it isn't for lack of trying. Sorry.
tl;dr: we're not Wikipedia. Leave the lists to them and leave the actual q&a to us.
Closing this question obeys the letter of the (vague) law, but not the spirit.
I was looking for games in a well-defined series, not games that "fit specific criteria or are like an existing game". This question doesn't elicit long meaningless lists of games, as should be obvious from the fact that it has only one answer. (#)
This "(vague)" rule you're quoting is so vague, it doesn't even exist. It is not this policy that got this question closed at all; vagueness of the criteria, breadth of the list, objectivity, meaningfullness of the list and number of answers are all irrelevant to the matter at hand.
The policy is "Game recommendation and game repository questions are off-topic, period." That's all there is to it and it is anything but vague.