A lot of Pokemon games have been released over the course of the past few decades. A lot of focus is typically on the main games that are released by The Pokemon Company, but there have also been remakes and spin-offs. With so many games available, it makes forming a list of the best or worst games difficult.
Well, not only has Digital Trends managed to do this with the main Pokemon games, but they even created a separate list for the remakes and yet another list for the spin-offs. It is worth noting that the games in all 3 lists are ranked from best to worst, according to Digital Trends. You can see the lists in full down below.
Main Games
- Pokémon Gold/Silver/Crystal
- Pokémon Red/Blue/Yellow
- Pokémon Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald
- Pokemon Legends: Arceus
- Pokémon Scarlet and Violet
- Pokémon Sword and Shield
- Pokémon Ultra Sun/Moon
- Pokémon X/Y
- Pokémon Diamond/Pearl/Platinum
- Pokémon White/Black and White/Black 2
Remakes
- Pokémon HeartGold and SoulSilver
- Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen
- Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire
- Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl
- Pokémon Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon
Spin-offs
- New Pokémon Snap
- Pokémon Stadium
- Pokémon Conquest
- Pokémon TCG Online
- Pokémon Snap
- Pokémon Go
- Pokémon Unite
- Pokémon: Let’s Go
- Pokémon Puzzle League
- Pokémon Pinball
- Pokémon Café Mix
- Pokken Tournament DX
- Detective Pikachu
I agree with the number 1 choice, but Pearl diamond is easily no 2 and x y no 3 😋
Did they seriously put the Gen 1 games at No. 2? The games that are basically held together with duck tape?
I know nostalgia is a powerful thing but come on.
They also lumped BW together with BW2. That’s like combining gens 1 and 2.
gen 1 was a hot mess, gen 2 fixed a lot of things gen 1 had. gen 1 was fun but without doing glitches its just a boring game and this is coming from someone who was heavily invested in gen 1 as a kid.
Well nostalgia is only half the reason people praise the originals. While the games themselves don’t hold up well today, they were the first games. As such, they introduced us to the world of Pokémon. Its always easier to improve on what came before, but the concept was born with Red and Green/Blue. Sure they’ve made many quality of life improvements since these games and they’re hard to go back and play in this modern era. But the idea of exploring a new world, the ability to create any team you want, trading with your friends, evolution making your cute Pokémon into a powerhouse, typing to give these creatures a design aesthetic as well as add a much needed layer of strategy, the steps needed to catch a Pokémon by weakening it to obtain it with a Pokéball. This was beyond genius and it laid the groundwork for all the games to come.
Saying its held together like duck tape tells me you have zero understanding of just how great these games actually are and why there are so many Gen 1ers out there. These games are so much more than the first generation. They are the foundation for the entire Pokémon formula. Without Gen 1, Pokémon isn’t even a franchise. The anime, card game, and all future video games owe the first generation for its phenomenal ideas and creative world. It doesn’t have to be your favorite, but you basically spit on the games that kickstarted the entire franchise… >_>
I completely second with this. I don’t disagree that the games have aged a whole lot but when people praise every generation they’ll say things like “gen 2 introduced breeding and brought in two new types, gen 3 introduced abilities and double battles, gen 4 had the physical/special split etc…”. Well shouldn’t gen 1 similarly get credit for introducing Pokemon, types, gyms, evolutions, pokeballs, elite 4, legendaries and so on? It remains the very foundation of every single mainline game (with the exception of Arceus if it counts as a mainline game). Every gen seems to be compared with what came before it and what its contribution was to the franchise yet gen 1 constantly seems to be compared to everything that came after it.
Being “the first games in the franchise” is not a valid reason for why they should be at the top of the list.
Looking at the games objectively compared to their successors, they’re awful.
Saying they “set the foundation” and “created the concept of the series” is nice and all, but the sequels, as you’ve already stated, massively built upon the foundation set by the Gen 1 games making them objectively better games.
I don’t think you really understand how these ranking lists work. If we went by your logic, the first game in any franchise would be considered the best just for being the game that started the concept.
Are you going to start telling me why Super Mario Bros. on the NES is the best Mario game next?
“Saying it’s held together like duct tape tells me you have zero understanding of just how great these games actually are and why there are so many Gen 1ers out there”
Lmao what a garbage assumption on your part, I’m fully aware of the impact these games once had on the industry and how it amassed so many fans. But the simple fact of the matter is that these games have aged like milk, and are inferior to the games that have majorly built upon the concept since.
They are obsolete in today’s world (especially considering that they’ve had two remakes at this point in both Fire Red/Leaf Green and the Let’s GO games which, despite the latter’s flaws, are both still superior to the originals) and have no reason to be played over its superior sequels and remakes, beyond pure nostalgia anyway.
My description of the games being “held together by duct tape” is honestly completely accurate; the games are buggy, unbalanced and unpolished messes.
And given that “genwunners” are some of the most toxic parts of the Pokémon community, I’m not sure why you thought it would be a good idea to bring them up in your argument lol.
Half of them are pathetic man children who delude themselves into thinking that nothing beyond the original 151 exist and criticise every future game in the franchise while holding tightly onto their barely functional mess of a game, all due to the rose-tinted glasses they all seem to exclusively wear.
Having read your response, I don’t think you fully understand why I posted my response in the first place. I’m not arguing the later generations for the first part aren’t better. In fact I even stated “they’re hard to go back and play in this modern era”, meaning I agree they didn’t age well compared to later games that made quality of life changes that improved on many aspects of the formula, even introducing main stay concepts that pushed the series forward in the right direction.
But you can’t take away the achievements this game accomplished. It literally started Pokémania back in the 90s and it introduced most of the main concepts still used to this day. Literally every game that followed uses the blueprints the original games laid out. If people want to rank it higher than objectively better games that came out later, that’s the reason why. Other games might be better, but this game introduced us to the world of Pokémon in the first place.
“Saying they “set the foundation” and “created the concept of the series” is nice and all, but the sequels, as you’ve already stated, massively built upon the foundation set by the Gen 1 games making them objectively better games.” This right here tells me you’re glossing over Gen 1’s achievements.
“The games that are basically held together with duck tape?” And this right here tells me you have no appreciation for the creative world these games introduced to us.
Sometimes objectively worse games can be ranked higher in a list for being the pioneers with a brave new concept that was expected to fail. And against all odds was the literal foundation for the highest grossing media franchise out there.
You really don’t get it, do you?
Being a “pioneer” of a series doesn’t automatically mean a game should be ranked higher on a list than its successors. I do very much appreciate what Gen 1 did back in the day, but a list of the “best” Pokémon games should not be about how impressive a game was at the time of its release, it’s about comparing how each game in the series holds up to one another in this day and age.
The past is over, obsessing about what a certain game once did for the franchise decades ago and thinking that automatically makes it the best is not rational thinking.
I never said you were arguing that the latter generations weren’t better, I’m not sure why you got that impression. Most of my previous comment was spent explaining to you that because all of the Pokémon sequels are objectively superior to the original, they should naturally be placed higher on the rankings.
Whatever Gen 1 did at its time of release is irrelevant to an objective discussion of what the best Pokémon game is.
Once again, your logic here makes no sense. You’re saying that just because a game is the first of its kind it automatically deserves to be treated as the best of its kind, when in reality that couldn’t be further from the truth.
At this point I can’t tell if you’re someone who genuinely doesn’t understand the concept of making a “best of” list, or you’re just a genwunner who’s upset that I’ve called out their favourite game for having aged like milk.
You do seem to have an obsession for telling me that I “don’t get” what Gen 1 did at the time of its release, when I absolutely do. It’s just not relevant to this discussion, as it says nothing to the quality of the game itself in this day and age.
And you seem to be the kind of person who abandons an old game just because a shinny new game comes along. All I’m saying is you need to strike a balance and acknowledge each game for its accomplishments and not just judge it for being the latest game with slightly improved gameplay over the last installment.
To be clear, Gen 1 isn’t my favorite game, heck it isn’t even my second favorite game in the franchise. I think newer games that improve on the original formula should be praised too. There are several more modern games that are great too.
“Being a “pioneer” of a series doesn’t automatically mean a game should be ranked higher on a list than its successors.” This is true, but it doesn’t mean dismiss what it achieved the moment the formula is barely changed for the better in the next installment either.
“I do very much appreciate what Gen 1 did back in the day, but a list of the “best” Pokémon games should not be about how impressive a game was at the time of its release, it’s about comparing how each game in the series holds up to one another in this day and age.” Well, you should consider what the original game brought to the table too. Its not just about how much better the franchise gets with each passing game introducing concepts that improve the games going forward. Finding a balance between the two is a much more fair way of comparing older games to the newer ones.
I guess my main point here is that if we went by your logic older games wouldn’t stand a chance against their improved counterparts. This is why what they originally brought to the table when they debuted is important to factor into a ranking. By your logic Red and Green/Blue would be near the bottom of the list simply because it doesn’t share the many necessary changes future games have made to improve on the old formula. I’m just saying its phenomenal concept that literally hyped an entire generation should be considered too. It doesn’t need to be number 1 on the list for that alone. But it would be criminal to rank it near the bottom just for having outdated mechanics.
And of course not, I’m not saying every first game should be on the top of a list. Pokémon is a special case as the world itself was very creative, the games were a massive success, and most of all the games going forward still use this basic formula. Most other games have evolved more, departing from their original game and loosely using the concept going forward. Most mainline Pokémon games play almost identically to the original so its harder to justify that they’ve made a greater departure from the original concept. Lets compare Super Mario Bros. to Mario Odyssey since you insist. These games might be platformers, but one game is radically different from the other.
Its laughable you would even make this point. I touched on it a little in my original response, but I felt the need to elaborate on it just to be clear I read your silly comparison and strongly disagree.
Pokémon is not a “special case” though, you’re literally just making stuff up to try and back up your awful arguments now.
Just because Pokémon has kept closer to its original premise than certain other franchises does not automatically mean that the original should be held in high regard in 2023. That’s just dumb nostalgia bs.
There are much, much better games in the series that deserve the higher spot on a list like this.
Why are you comparing Super Mario Bros, a 2D platformer, to Super Mario Odyssey, a 3D platformer? That literally makes zero sense lmao.
Instead compare Super Mario Bros with the New Super Mario Bros series, a series which arguably hasn’t changed much from its original premise either. Yet I still wouldn’t dream of putting the original Mario Bros over any of the New games, because that literally makes zero sense.
As creatively bankrupt as some of the New games might be, they still objectively play better than the original with far more content and QoL features which make it the superior game, therefore putting it higher on a list like this.
OG Mario did a lot of good back in the day, but those days are gone. It is not better than it’s successors, and therefore should not be higher on a list of the best games in the franchise.
It’s laughable that you are finding this incredibly simple concept so difficult to understand. Your silly little 2D and 3D Mario comparison really shows how little you understand how this works.
Scroll up, I responded to an earlier post…
Never mind, I reposted it here so you can see it.
And you seem to be the kind of person who abandons an old game just because a shinny new one comes along. All I’m saying is you need to strike a balance and acknowledge each game for its accomplishments and not just judge it for being the latest game with improved gameplay over the last installment.
To be clear, Gen 1 isn’t my favorite game, heck it isn’t even my second favorite game in the franchise. I agree and think newer games that improve on the original formula should be praised too.
“Being a “pioneer” of a series doesn’t automatically mean a game should be ranked higher on a list than its successors.” This is true, newer games that come along that make improvements should be acknowledged too. But it doesn’t mean dismiss what the older title achieved the moment the formula is changed for the better with future installments.
“I do very much appreciate what Gen 1 did back in the day, but a list of the “best” Pokémon games should not be about how impressive a game was at the time of its release, it’s about comparing how each game in the series holds up to one another in this day and age.” Well, you should consider what the original game brought to the table too. Its not just about how much better the franchise gets with each passing game introducing concepts that improve the games going forward. Finding a balance between the two is a much more fair way of comparing older games to the newer ones.
I guess my main point here is that if we went by your logic older games wouldn’t stand a chance against their improved counterparts. This is the reason you also need to consider what older titles did for the franchise when you’re ranking the best games. By your logic Red and Green/Blue would be near the bottom of the list simply because it doesn’t share the many necessary changes future games have made to improve on the old formula. I’m just saying its phenomenal concept that literally hyped an entire generation should be considered too. It doesn’t need to be number 1 on the list for that alone. But it would be criminal to rank it near the bottom just for having outdated mechanics.
GSC aren’t that good, rose tinted glasses. Horrible level curve
Pokemon: Let’s Go is a remake not a spin off, and Pokemon Cafe Mix is okay but the gameplay is way too simple to have it be above other apps like Pokemon Master, Pokemon Picross, and Pokemon Shuffle
Sword/Shield and XY need to be at the bottom of the list… but other than that I agree with the rankings.
Huh, i thought Pokemon Scarlet and Violet was everyones favorite. Everyone on this fourm is always posting about all the bugs and glitches. Naturally i assumed It’s because of how passionate they are about Scarlet and Violet.
Such a weird ranking… Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon aren’t remakes. Let’s Go is a remake, not a spin-off. They do at least put Gen 2 above Gen 1, but Gen 5 (my favorite Gen) at the absolute bottom hurts. I can respect New Pokemon Snap’s placement though
I think gen 3 and 4 remakes was one of the best Pokemon games In the series. I didn’t play Pokemon Cafe but I did played Pokemon Unite.
Also I just realised, no Mystery Dungeon games on the spin-off list? They put Unite and Cafe Mix on there but not some of the most beloved Pokemon spin-offs ever made?
I’m sorry but this is a terrible, terrible list.
this list is garbage. didnt even mention the 2 best spin offs gale of darkness & colosseum
What an awful list, dppt ranked lo swsh ranked high, no mention of mystery dungeon or ranger games at all