In gen 1, Giovanni gives the TM for Fissure. Earthquake is instead found in Silph Co.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
FPS being "bad" comes into play if the game can't consistently run at the frame rate it was designed to run at, it's not so much a matter of actual value. If a game was designed to run at 20 FPS and it does so during normal gameplay, it's probably going to look fine. Same with 30, and naturally with 60 and up. It's when said game has consistent problems keeping that frame rate during normal gameplay that it becomes an issue.
Granted, I'm not a PC gamer (heck, I don't own and have never played a PS5/any modern XBox), so that should tell you the kind of games I play and how much I value ridiculous FPS rates (I think it's a waste of resources to go much above 60 in most cases, to be clear), but it definitely matters much more to function at the level a game was designed to run at than to push for an arbitrarily higher frame rate.
I'm not sure what the standard for modern CGI movies/cartoons is nowadays, but the old traditional animation standard was 24 FPS. If you try and tell me that "classic" animation looks bad now because it had a "poor" FPS I'm liable to disregard your opinion for the foreseeable future.
I don't fully agree with this because there are factual differences in how a game feels, and plays by framerate. While not every game needs a higher framerate, a lot of genres vastly benefit from a higher framerate. Not just visually, but in actual game feel. The more "active" a game is and intensive with inputs, the more that higher framerate counts. When you press the button, instead of having to go between frame 1 and 2, it can hit 1, 2, 3 or 4, meaning that it's more likely for your input to be registered faster. With more images in specific gaps of time, it's much more likely that you will see something the fastest you possibly can, and thus can react faster as well.
Hell, a lot of it isn't even about visual quality. In competitive games nowadays, people turn down the graphics settings specifically to get a higher framerate, and buy small high refresh-rate monitors to keep going.
It's also not like every game follows this to a tee, for the record, too. Sometimes games prioritize the wrong side of graphical fidelity versus framerate, at least in my opinion. You will not catch me playing a 2D platform that is 30FPS, any time I've tried one it feels really wrong imo
Now in the context of turn-based JRPGS? Oh yeah, 30fps is 1000% fine don't get me wrong. I'm mostly explaining this because I feel like framerate is often confused as just being a visual fidelity problem, when it's also game feel, and matters to competitive play. I also agree that lower framerates do not necessarily look worse if the game is made around it. I am not a fan of "oh make 60fps animation", that's silly
FPS isn't necessarily coupled to input polling rate (nor is it necessarily coupled with how often the game actually checks for interactions between actors). This is true with older games and I don't see why it would change.
That said, I can definitely see a point to wanting higher FPS (again, to a reasonable limit) for action games, particularly ones that are PvP. But, with that in mind, I think players having a potential advantage in genres like that just because they have the system/setup to run a game at a higher FPS than someone else might is really bad game... well, not design, but I can't think of a better word. But I hope you get what I mean. I know that a good chunk of the public gaming space wants higher FPS on their games, so the flexibility is done to appeal to them while also allowing for people who don't have a better setup to play their games. It just feels like a really awkward sort of pay-to-win that doesn't even directly go to the pockets of the game devs. If it's a single-player game, I don't see much harm in it, though.
I understand the logic behind this but, forgive me, I'm actually not sure what sorts of games can (variably?) run super high FPS (going to say... 120 FPS as a baseline I guess?) as a crotchety old console (Nintendo) gamer. Shooters, fairly sure, and various multiplayer survival games probably. Does it also extend to MOBAs? I'd actually like some information here
For sure, try to optimize your game for your genre and audience. It's not as though one frame rate is perfect for all games, not trying to insinuate that. But I do think there's a limit to increasing frame rate while assuming it also increases game feel/responsiveness, even for action games.
Interestingly I am watching a vod of someone playing BotW Second Wind at 72 FPS right now (not as a result of this conversation, it's something I was doing anyway). Hard for me to say if I'm actually seeing it at 60 FPS considering it's from a Twitch vod that is now uploaded on Youtube, but the prerendered cutscenes that play at 30 FPS do look a little choppier (not bad, but it's slightly less smooth).
The same streamer is mostly known for playing OoT, a game that runs as 20 FPS.
(I know that's a romhack so it'd likely be emulated anyways but this made me think of this) It's actually an interesting quirk that yeah, basically every hardcore Nintendo streamer nowadays is emulating the games. If it's compatible, at least, some games still don't run well enough for that.
It's just better for image quality I suppose, but I think it's interesting when watching False Swipe Gaming even to see all the emulation buffs they put to the footage.
(what direct footage with no resolution bump on citra looks like, also accurate to how it'd look with direct hardware- I've recorded from a 3DS before):
False Swipe Gaming:
Honestly? Just goes to show that Pokemon Stars really made sense, and it's kinda depressing we didn't get it in my opinion.
You can run mods on Switch.
The bigger deal is how much easier it is to handle any kind of video business on PC.
You'd probably need some kind of capture card to record or stream Switch games, and you'd still need a powerful PC to do the bulk of the editing anyway.
It's just smart to streamline things as much as possible.
I know. I have a modded Switch.
It's just extremely inconvenient. Not just because recording, but because a lot of mods can be shaky and crashes on it are more inconvenient. And if you're making modded content anyways, ya might as well go full in on visual enhancements, which a lot of Switch games struggle to run with (I know 60FPS mods exist for some of them, but they can have issues)
Sorry for double-post, but I decided to do another tier list. I like making these semi-frequently, usually every few months so I can see my own opinions at the time visualized. As well as that, my opinions on this are always controversial so that is why I am putting it here.
This is the 4 months old list. ^ (Also, this is not tiered within tiers!!!)
Major Changes from my list a few months ago (This list is tiered within tiers!):
-Legends Arceus goes up two tiers..
-I tiered within the tiers.
-X tier now exists, and is a bit crowded tbh.
-HGSS goes up a tier.
-BDSP goes up a tier.
-BW goes down a tier.
-FRLG goes down a tier.
-Everything except for the highest tier is one tier lower relatively, though this does not mean I think that the games below got worse, I just wanted another gap tier and I started at the top to accomplish this. it's weird A.
So here is what has changed for this:
Legends Arceus: When Palworld came out, I actually found it to be a decent time, albeit a cynical title with little artistic integrity. It made me reconsider my feelings on Legends Arceus, a game which I rated highly on release, but over time started to find less and less compelling. However, after this change in perspective towards enjoying the more grindy side of Palworld, the more grindy side of Legends Arceus was really fun. I think on replays I really just was wishing that Legends Arceus was more structured with its campaign and had more trainer battles and the like, because I did not care to do the Pokedex again. But playing like I did originally with a fresh head made it addicting all over again, going for Pokedex Level 10 on almost every Pokemon I saw. I did not beat the game, but I sunk like another 20 hours in a pretty short period of time into this game that I thought I'd never really get that deep into again. This is not enough for me to put it in the highest tier, but 5th place isn't bad at all.
Heartgold Soulsilver: These are games that I did not necessarily replay for it to go a tier higher, but it's more that I just reconsidered my opinion on it individually. My biggest issue with this game is the teambuilding, but I do really appreciate the non-linearity in the midgame and the region's vibes. Ultimately, I decided that with the new tier gap I'd put it one higher because I felt it was much above BDSP (it's a more artistic and heartful remake 100%), but I did not think it was better than the other games in the tier, so it goes behind it.
Brilliant Diamond Shining Pearl: This is one of the hotter takes, and part of it is honestly influenced by some mods I've used when playing it, I have to be honest. 60fps makes the game look and feel great. But even on its own merit, if you look at my messages I have always felt it is the best way to play Sinnoh. I simply do not care about Platinum's additions outside of the graphical and speed improvements, but to me BDSP looks better and feels better anyways. This game is pretty cynically made, but I think as a more traditional Pokemon game remade in the modern engine it honestly is just fun to play. Bugs is a bit of an issue, but post patches it's kinda? eh. I think overall it just feels better than the other Sinnoh games, and Ruby/Sapphire are really good but I feel like they're around equal. I put it in front because it's funnier considering the public opinion on it lol.
Black White: While it's a bit weird because I added the tier above it, and the name is technically the same, it's down considering it's left the tier of USUM and is now a gap below it and Legends Arceus, when before it was equal with USUM and higher than Legends. Don't judge me for doing weird shit with my list! I just find that over time, this is one of my least favorite games to teambuild in. I don't fuck w/ the vibes of a lot of the Pokemon, and especially Pokemon like Whimsicott feel boring and naked without its Fairy-Type in the next generation. There are so many monotypes, or Pokemon that are weirdly hard to train, and it feels like the game is funneling you down. While linearity is not necessarily a bad thing, I think BW does not have the story to back it up. I've talked before about how the game just follows a cycle of "Gym (with SE Pokemon right next to it -> Rival -> Team Plasma, loop) and it gets tiring. Sun and Moon has in my opinion a far better story that commits to its themes. I never liked how Ghetsis is used in the plot, and I feel that N being manipulated into having his opinions takes away a lot of the weight from the premise "Are Trainers abusive?" I don't expect them to say "yes", but I want it to actually be something that is adequately tackled. If I am right, when we meet N at the beginning of the game it is one of the few times he is outside of Ghetsis' hold, and is out seeing the world. He meets us, who he notes the Pokemon like, and over and over only Team Plasma is shown to be abusive to Pokemon. Ghetsis then later is revealed to have manipulated N. If N has good proof that there is a systemic problem, then the game never shows it, and if anything we only see counter-examples. It makes me feel less like N is an ideological adversary, and more that he is just a manipulated person who is annoyingly smug. It's even more ironic that this is the game about "Black and White", or moreso trying to fight black and white thinking. Yet, this is an entirely black and white question! There is not a single sign of abuse from normal trainers, and only from organized criminals. The main thought leader was manipulated into it, and the person who wants it is just doing it to gain power. There is no debate in-universe: this is a black and white debate, training is not abuse. And again, that is fine, but they should at least pretend to give N arguments that sow doubt into the player in more ways than just reiterating "Pokeballs bad, training bad".
Firered Leafgreen: Idk. It's Kanto again, but in GBA graphics. This is probably a hot take but I don't like the spritework in this game. It just feels really low-quality to me compared to RSE, and I don't like the music generally either. The texturing is off, I don't like the soundfont, or normal font actually. It's still probably the best way to experience Kanto as a sole experience, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
Within-tier notes: Sword and Shield while not very good, I still believe is perfectly playable as a campaign. While its story is unfinished, I actually think the graphical style outside of the Wild Area is charming, and that it can be kind of a "Kirby RPG". It's filler, but it's not bad filler. Pokemon X and Y are above Platinum, but this may change with me about to do a replay of it (once I get my final done, which I am currently procrastinating on). This will be with a difficulty mod that was recommended to me in Orange Island SQSA that brings it to around USUM difficulty while not changing much else. My theory is that the core issue with the game is just straight up its difficulty. With the game being so breezy easy, you spend so little time in each area that it becomes more forgettable, and there is no tension to form memories off of. With Kalos fever in me due to the Legends ZA announcement, I am anticipating exploring many of the dungeons that I feel are actually pretty cool, hopefully with some actual difficulty to make them fun. Pokemon Sun and Moon is still my favorite, with USUM being behind it and Black 2 White 2 giving it a strong run for its money. I hope one day the top tier isn't so crowded, but this is just accurate to how I feel at the time. Pokemon Emerald is at the top of A and that's because I kind of think of it as the best of the "classic" games, that are not modern. ORAS is my general favorite "classic style" Pokemon game, but Emerald just has a lot of good qualities in my opinion too, and it holds up the best of the first four gens in my opinion.
Let's Go Pikachu Eevee: It's at the lowest (actual) tier, but that doesn't mean I don't think it has merit- it's just really not for me. Not my demographic, and I also just feel that for its price especially, it's insanely lacking in content or substance. This was $60 and because it was the first Pokemon game on the system, I bought it because I just wanted a Pokemon game. Usually with new Pokemon games I kind of blast through the campaign within a week, or with some of them? A weekend! Well, I played 5 hours into LGPE and then it was three weeks before I was like... I should get my money's worth, huh? It wasn't a bad time, but it was just A Time.
Scarlet Violet: And, of course, this tier. I have no clue how to rank this game. Do I rank it just on how I felt when playing it when it was new? Do I rank it on the content? How much influence should its insane lack of polish and low framerate have on where I put it? I am going to chicken out and simply not rank it, because I am simply not comfortable in saying that it is above or lower than some Pokemon games' quality. Scarlet/Violet has a campaign I enjoy with core gameplay that I found addicting, but it's also like, objectively low quality. And I do take that into account with my own ratings.
This is the 4 months old list. ^ (Also, this is not tiered within tiers!!!)
Major Changes from my list a few months ago (This list is tiered within tiers!):
-Legends Arceus goes up two tiers..
-I tiered within the tiers.
-X tier now exists, and is a bit crowded tbh.
-HGSS goes up a tier.
-BDSP goes up a tier.
-BW goes down a tier.
-FRLG goes down a tier.
-Everything except for the highest tier is one tier lower relatively, though this does not mean I think that the games below got worse, I just wanted another gap tier and I started at the top to accomplish this. it's weird A.
So here is what has changed for this:
Legends Arceus: When Palworld came out, I actually found it to be a decent time, albeit a cynical title with little artistic integrity. It made me reconsider my feelings on Legends Arceus, a game which I rated highly on release, but over time started to find less and less compelling. However, after this change in perspective towards enjoying the more grindy side of Palworld, the more grindy side of Legends Arceus was really fun. I think on replays I really just was wishing that Legends Arceus was more structured with its campaign and had more trainer battles and the like, because I did not care to do the Pokedex again. But playing like I did originally with a fresh head made it addicting all over again, going for Pokedex Level 10 on almost every Pokemon I saw. I did not beat the game, but I sunk like another 20 hours in a pretty short period of time into this game that I thought I'd never really get that deep into again. This is not enough for me to put it in the highest tier, but 5th place isn't bad at all.
Heartgold Soulsilver: These are games that I did not necessarily replay for it to go a tier higher, but it's more that I just reconsidered my opinion on it individually. My biggest issue with this game is the teambuilding, but I do really appreciate the non-linearity in the midgame and the region's vibes. Ultimately, I decided that with the new tier gap I'd put it one higher because I felt it was much above BDSP (it's a more artistic and heartful remake 100%), but I did not think it was better than the other games in the tier, so it goes behind it.
Brilliant Diamond Shining Pearl: This is one of the hotter takes, and part of it is honestly influenced by some mods I've used when playing it, I have to be honest. 60fps makes the game look and feel great. But even on its own merit, if you look at my messages I have always felt it is the best way to play Sinnoh. I simply do not care about Platinum's additions outside of the graphical and speed improvements, but to me BDSP looks better and feels better anyways. This game is pretty cynically made, but I think as a more traditional Pokemon game remade in the modern engine it honestly is just fun to play. Bugs is a bit of an issue, but post patches it's kinda? eh. I think overall it just feels better than the other Sinnoh games, and Ruby/Sapphire are really good but I feel like they're around equal. I put it in front because it's funnier considering the public opinion on it lol.
Black White: While it's a bit weird because I added the tier above it, and the name is technically the same, it's down considering it's left the tier of USUM and is now a gap below it and Legends Arceus, when before it was equal with USUM and higher than Legends. Don't judge me for doing weird shit with my list! I just find that over time, this is one of my least favorite games to teambuild in. I don't fuck w/ the vibes of a lot of the Pokemon, and especially Pokemon like Whimsicott feel boring and naked without its Fairy-Type in the next generation. There are so many monotypes, or Pokemon that are weirdly hard to train, and it feels like the game is funneling you down. While linearity is not necessarily a bad thing, I think BW does not have the story to back it up. I've talked before about how the game just follows a cycle of "Gym (with SE Pokemon right next to it -> Rival -> Team Plasma, loop) and it gets tiring. Sun and Moon has in my opinion a far better story that commits to its themes. I never liked how Ghetsis is used in the plot, and I feel that N being manipulated into having his opinions takes away a lot of the weight from the premise "Are Trainers abusive?" I don't expect them to say "yes", but I want it to actually be something that is adequately tackled. If I am right, when we meet N at the beginning of the game it is one of the few times he is outside of Ghetsis' hold, and is out seeing the world. He meets us, who he notes the Pokemon like, and over and over only Team Plasma is shown to be abusive to Pokemon. Ghetsis then later is revealed to have manipulated N. If N has good proof that there is a systemic problem, then the game never shows it, and if anything we only see counter-examples. It makes me feel less like N is an ideological adversary, and more that he is just a manipulated person who is annoyingly smug. It's even more ironic that this is the game about "Black and White", or moreso trying to fight black and white thinking. Yet, this is an entirely black and white question! There is not a single sign of abuse from normal trainers, and only from organized criminals. The main thought leader was manipulated into it, and the person who wants it is just doing it to gain power. There is no debate in-universe: this is a black and white debate, training is not abuse. And again, that is fine, but they should at least pretend to give N arguments that sow doubt into the player in more ways than just reiterating "Pokeballs bad, training bad".
Firered Leafgreen: Idk. It's Kanto again, but in GBA graphics. This is probably a hot take but I don't like the spritework in this game. It just feels really low-quality to me compared to RSE, and I don't like the music generally either. The texturing is off, I don't like the soundfont, or normal font actually. It's still probably the best way to experience Kanto as a sole experience, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
Within-tier notes: Sword and Shield while not very good, I still believe is perfectly playable as a campaign. While its story is unfinished, I actually think the graphical style outside of the Wild Area is charming, and that it can be kind of a "Kirby RPG". It's filler, but it's not bad filler. Pokemon X and Y are above Platinum, but this may change with me about to do a replay of it (once I get my final done, which I am currently procrastinating on). This will be with a difficulty mod that was recommended to me in Orange Island SQSA that brings it to around USUM difficulty while not changing much else. My theory is that the core issue with the game is just straight up its difficulty. With the game being so breezy easy, you spend so little time in each area that it becomes more forgettable, and there is no tension to form memories off of. With Kalos fever in me due to the Legends ZA announcement, I am anticipating exploring many of the dungeons that I feel are actually pretty cool, hopefully with some actual difficulty to make them fun. Pokemon Sun and Moon is still my favorite, with USUM being behind it and Black 2 White 2 giving it a strong run for its money. I hope one day the top tier isn't so crowded, but this is just accurate to how I feel at the time. Pokemon Emerald is at the top of A and that's because I kind of think of it as the best of the "classic" games, that are not modern. ORAS is my general favorite "classic style" Pokemon game, but Emerald just has a lot of good qualities in my opinion too, and it holds up the best of the first four gens in my opinion.
Let's Go Pikachu Eevee: It's at the lowest (actual) tier, but that doesn't mean I don't think it has merit- it's just really not for me. Not my demographic, and I also just feel that for its price especially, it's insanely lacking in content or substance. This was $60 and because it was the first Pokemon game on the system, I bought it because I just wanted a Pokemon game. Usually with new Pokemon games I kind of blast through the campaign within a week, or with some of them? A weekend! Well, I played 5 hours into LGPE and then it was three weeks before I was like... I should get my money's worth, huh? It wasn't a bad time, but it was just A Time.
Scarlet Violet: And, of course, this tier. I have no clue how to rank this game. Do I rank it just on how I felt when playing it when it was new? Do I rank it on the content? How much influence should its insane lack of polish and low framerate have on where I put it? I am going to chicken out and simply not rank it, because I am simply not comfortable in saying that it is above or lower than some Pokemon games' quality. Scarlet/Violet has a campaign I enjoy with core gameplay that I found addicting, but it's also like, objectively low quality. And I do take that into account with my own ratings.
Attachments
Based tier list for ranking the alola games and ORAS so high (I agree they are really good games).
Technically double post but also wanted to do a pokemon game tier list
Although the haven't played tier looks large, the only gen I haven't played at all is Gen 2, most of the others are just the worse versions of the same region/gen.
S: These two games I consider the peak of pokemon games. ORAS was my first game I ever played, so I may be a bit biased, however I believe that it is the titular pokemon game. Take everything that Hoenn usually has, refine them, even add new things that make the game better (soaring will be missed my beloved) and you have the best game created. Yes, there is no battle frontier, but that's minor compared to everything else added. USUM is a close second, as everything besides the cutscenes are perfect. I honestly did not really see a downgrade in the story that everybody likes to exclaim, and everything else is improved. This is a game that is 100% the best game on a first playthrough, and then 90% the best game on repeat playthroughs.
A: Despite the fact that the graphics and performance are subpar, I think SV are great games. Everything else about them, the dex, the story, the difficulty (well, the difficulty is alright, but its pokemon so what did you expect) are great. DLC's improve on this somehow and are really really great (Indigo disk is hard AF if you use a new team). BW2 are just overall great games, I don't think I have to explain much more since everybody and their mother loves this game. Sun and Moon are slightly worse versions of USUM, and so a tier below is fair. Legends Arcues I would have 6 months ago ranked in S, but they have lost a bit of their lustre over time. Definetely not bad games, just great games instead of being amazing.
B: Platinum I feel like is a bit overhyped for what its worth, not a bad game but not anything spectacular. It probably should be A rank, but everything in A rank feels a step above it. HGSS are similar deals, though they have more variance in their highs and lows (highs mainly being kanto and lows being the weird level curves) Black and White are basically slightly worse versions of BW2, so B rank I think is fair. FRLG are good games, not anything spectacular. Pokemon Emerald I feel is the best Hoenn game if you want to experience 'old' Hoenn, but are fine games on there own.
C: Sword and Shield where not bad games, but I wouldn't consider them good. The base game is honestly D tier, but the DLC's absolutely make it up as if I was just ranking the DLC's, they would be B rank. So, a middle ground I think is fair. They feel like just a pokemon game and nothing more, nothing less. Hot take, but Pokemon XD: Gales of Darkness is a mid game. Yes, the whole catching shadow pokemon thing is a cool idea, but in practice it is annoying if you want to catch them all, as you have to deal them potentially wrecking your entire team if they don't decide to stay in the ball. It does have some unique teambuilding options, but it feels like "Baby's second rom hack" because while it isn't bad, it doesn't necessarily feel like you played a great game.
D: Only X/Y in this tier, just meh games. They needed something to pull you in and I think ant4456 summed it up perfectly, the difficulty means you breeze by it so quickly and thus no connections can be made. I have replayed it 3 times, and each time I feel like it is an empty game, not much substance.
E: Only Let's Go is in this tier, and its just underwhelming, but moreso because its kanto, but more child friendly. The polish on this game is the main thing saving it from F tier, but its just not enough of an experience. It feels like they boiled kanto down to its core, which is not a good thing since the original kanto experience is not the best in my opinion.
F: The only bad pokemon game I think I have played, I genuinelly had a bad time with this. This is primarily due to the lack of features, but also the reduced pokedex. The Brock fight is a chore unless you know that the mankey and nidorans on the side route of viridian city (which I did not know about because they usually are not there) since you have to use butterfree, which takes so long to grind up to. Everything else was just mediocre to bad, it felt unfinished, despite the fact this is basically a sequel game.
Although the haven't played tier looks large, the only gen I haven't played at all is Gen 2, most of the others are just the worse versions of the same region/gen.
S: These two games I consider the peak of pokemon games. ORAS was my first game I ever played, so I may be a bit biased, however I believe that it is the titular pokemon game. Take everything that Hoenn usually has, refine them, even add new things that make the game better (soaring will be missed my beloved) and you have the best game created. Yes, there is no battle frontier, but that's minor compared to everything else added. USUM is a close second, as everything besides the cutscenes are perfect. I honestly did not really see a downgrade in the story that everybody likes to exclaim, and everything else is improved. This is a game that is 100% the best game on a first playthrough, and then 90% the best game on repeat playthroughs.
A: Despite the fact that the graphics and performance are subpar, I think SV are great games. Everything else about them, the dex, the story, the difficulty (well, the difficulty is alright, but its pokemon so what did you expect) are great. DLC's improve on this somehow and are really really great (Indigo disk is hard AF if you use a new team). BW2 are just overall great games, I don't think I have to explain much more since everybody and their mother loves this game. Sun and Moon are slightly worse versions of USUM, and so a tier below is fair. Legends Arcues I would have 6 months ago ranked in S, but they have lost a bit of their lustre over time. Definetely not bad games, just great games instead of being amazing.
B: Platinum I feel like is a bit overhyped for what its worth, not a bad game but not anything spectacular. It probably should be A rank, but everything in A rank feels a step above it. HGSS are similar deals, though they have more variance in their highs and lows (highs mainly being kanto and lows being the weird level curves) Black and White are basically slightly worse versions of BW2, so B rank I think is fair. FRLG are good games, not anything spectacular. Pokemon Emerald I feel is the best Hoenn game if you want to experience 'old' Hoenn, but are fine games on there own.
C: Sword and Shield where not bad games, but I wouldn't consider them good. The base game is honestly D tier, but the DLC's absolutely make it up as if I was just ranking the DLC's, they would be B rank. So, a middle ground I think is fair. They feel like just a pokemon game and nothing more, nothing less. Hot take, but Pokemon XD: Gales of Darkness is a mid game. Yes, the whole catching shadow pokemon thing is a cool idea, but in practice it is annoying if you want to catch them all, as you have to deal them potentially wrecking your entire team if they don't decide to stay in the ball. It does have some unique teambuilding options, but it feels like "Baby's second rom hack" because while it isn't bad, it doesn't necessarily feel like you played a great game.
D: Only X/Y in this tier, just meh games. They needed something to pull you in and I think ant4456 summed it up perfectly, the difficulty means you breeze by it so quickly and thus no connections can be made. I have replayed it 3 times, and each time I feel like it is an empty game, not much substance.
E: Only Let's Go is in this tier, and its just underwhelming, but moreso because its kanto, but more child friendly. The polish on this game is the main thing saving it from F tier, but its just not enough of an experience. It feels like they boiled kanto down to its core, which is not a good thing since the original kanto experience is not the best in my opinion.
F: The only bad pokemon game I think I have played, I genuinelly had a bad time with this. This is primarily due to the lack of features, but also the reduced pokedex. The Brock fight is a chore unless you know that the mankey and nidorans on the side route of viridian city (which I did not know about because they usually are not there) since you have to use butterfree, which takes so long to grind up to. Everything else was just mediocre to bad, it felt unfinished, despite the fact this is basically a sequel game.