Pokemon LeafGreen and FireRed Versions Review

Brand: Nintendo

Released: September 7, 2024

Updated: 54 minutes ago

3.9

Overall review score

697

Review evidence points

Scored features

Expert reviews

Bottom Line

Choose it for a faithful, addictive Kanto RPG with excellent replay value and strong postgame content. Skip it if local-only trading, old-school grinding, or a barebones $20 port outweighs the nostalgia.

Best for

Best for longtime Pokémon fans and newcomers who want a compact, strategic Kanto adventure with strong replay value, portable play, and substantial postgame collecting.

Not for

Skip it if you expect modern quality-of-life features, online trading, minimal grinding, or a heavily enhanced anniversary rerelease.

Verdict

FireRed and LeafGreen still succeed because the essentials remain unusually strong: Kanto rewards exploration, team-building keeps turn-based combat strategic, the soundtrack is memorable, and the Sevii Islands add a substantial postgame. The tradeoff is age and packaging. Grinding is slower than in newer Pokémon games, HMs and older move rules add friction, and some visuals, menus, and movement feel dated. More importantly, the Switch rerelease is repeatedly criticized for doing too little: online trading is absent, emulator-style conveniences are missing, and the standalone price feels high to many. For players who value the classic structure and portable convenience, the underlying RPG remains deeply replayable; those expecting a modernized anniversary edition may find the port frustratingly conservative.

Feature Scorecards

Very positive 4.5-5.0

32 (45%)
Positive 3.5-4.4

19 (27%)
Neutral 2.5-3.4

13 (18%)
Negative 1.5-2.4

7 (10%)

Pros

faithfulness to franchise

4.9

34 reviews strong consensus
faithfulness to franchise: 4.9, 34 reviews, strong consensus

These games preserve the classic Pokémon formula exceptionally well, keeping the original Kanto structure while layering in key Generation 3 mechanics and postgame content.
fun factor

4.8

36 reviews strong consensus
fun factor: 4.8, 36 reviews, strong consensus

Even critics of the rerelease’s pricing and presentation repeatedly describe the underlying game as genuinely fun, addictive, and easy to lose hours in.
core gameplay loop

4.8

29 reviews strong consensus
core gameplay loop: 4.8, 29 reviews, strong consensus

Exploring, catching, training, and battling remains remarkably addictive. The loop is repeatedly described as the reason these games still work decades later.
endgame content

4.7

22 reviews strong consensus
endgame content: 4.7, 22 reviews, strong consensus

The Sevii Islands, stronger opponents, legendary encounters, and continued collecting give the game a substantial postgame that many consider one of the remake’s defining strengths.
replay value

4.7

21 reviews strong consensus
replay value: 4.7, 21 reviews, strong consensus

Different starters, team combinations, route orders, challenge runs, collecting goals, and postgame content make repeated playthroughs unusually durable.
combat system

4.7

18 reviews strong consensus
combat system: 4.7, 18 reviews, strong consensus

Turn-based battles remain the game’s biggest strength: simple to operate, but deep enough that typing, abilities, movesets, stats, and team construction reward planning.

Cons

innovation

1.9

22 reviews low consensus
innovation: 1.9, 22 reviews, low consensus

The original 2004 remake added worthwhile mechanics and wireless features, but the 2026 rerelease is widely viewed as conservative, with very little new beyond targeted fixes and event access.
platform-specific feature support

2.0

19 reviews strong consensus
platform-specific feature support: 2.0, 19 reviews, strong consensus

The Switch versions gain portability, local wireless, event access, and some modern compatibility, but omit online trading, save states, rewind, filters, widescreen, and other expected conveniences.
originality

1.5

3 reviews strong consensus
originality: 1.5, 3 reviews, strong consensus

The Kanto formula is foundational rather than novel today; the remake preserves what works, but repeated story beats and limited new ideas can make it feel familiar to longtime players.
monetization fairness

1.5

2 reviews limited evidence
monetization fairness: 1.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence

Selling the versions separately draws sharp criticism, with the harshest takes calling the rerelease overpriced and needlessly extractive.
multiplayer design

2.7

23 reviews low consensus
multiplayer design: 2.7, 23 reviews, low consensus

Trading and battling remain central to the design, but the Switch release’s local-only communication is the most repeated multiplayer complaint and can block trade evolutions or Pokédex completion.
social features

2.7

22 reviews low consensus
social features: 2.7, 22 reviews, low consensus

Pokémon’s trading culture remains integral to the experience, but local-only communication on Switch sharply limits that social loop for players without nearby friends.

View all 71 feature scores

Compared With Category Average

Compared with other Video Games, this product is above average in bug frequency, endgame content, tutorial quality, near average in content variety, art direction, below average in innovation, originality, platform-specific feature support.

Above average 0.4+ pts higher

34 (49%)
Same as average within 0.3 pts

17 (24%)
Below average 0.4+ pts lower

19 (27%)

Largest category differences

Attribute	This product	Category average	Difference
innovation	1.9	4.0	-2.1
originality	1.5	3.8	-2.3
platform-specific feature support	2.0	3.7	-1.7
protagonist appeal	2.0	3.9	-1.9
character development	2.0	3.9	-1.9
bug frequency	5.0	3.2	+1.8
monetization fairness	1.5	3.3	-1.8
sound design	2.8	4.4	-1.5

Consider This Instead

If you want better content variety

Choose Monster Hunter Stories 3: Twisted Reflection. It scores 4.9 vs 4.2 for content variety, with a 4.2 overall score.

Compare

If you want better gameplay mechanics

Choose Street Fighter 6. It scores 4.9 vs 4.0 for gameplay mechanics, with a 4.2 overall score.

Compare

If you want better innovation

Choose Death Stranding 2: On the Beach. It scores 5.0 vs 1.9 for innovation, with a 4.3 overall score.

Compare

If you want better platform-specific feature support

Choose Kirby Air Riders. It scores 4.8 vs 2.0 for platform-specific feature support, with a 4.3 overall score.

Compare

Let's Go

Worse: overall Generation 1 experience The reviewer calls these the definitive Gen One versions and prefers them to Let's Go.

Pokemon Ruby

Worse: graphics The reviewer prefers FireRed and LeafGreen's graphics to Pokemon Ruby and Sapphire versions.

Pokemon Sun and Moon

Better: newcomer experience and modern mechanics The reviewer recommends the newer entry over this game for first-time Pokémon players.

FAQ

Do FireRed and LeafGreen still hold up?

Yes for the fundamentals: the catch-battle-explore loop, Kanto’s layout, team-building, and replayability are repeatedly praised. The friction comes from older progression and convenience systems.

Can you trade or battle online on Switch?

The supplied reviews consistently describe trading and battling as local-only on Switch. That can make version exclusives, trade evolutions, and Pokédex completion difficult without another nearby player.

Are these games grindy?

They can be. Experience is distributed far more manually than in newer Pokémon games, so keeping a full team leveled often requires switching Pokémon and repeating battles.

Is there meaningful postgame content?

Yes. The Sevii Islands, stronger battles, extra Pokémon, and legendary/event encounters are repeatedly highlighted as major reasons to keep playing after the Elite Four.

How do the graphics and audio hold up?

The colorful pixel art and sprites are widely admired, and the soundtrack is a major strength. Sound effects, sparse animation, black borders, and minimal modern presentation draw more criticism.

Are the Switch versions worth the $20 asking price?

Opinions are split. Some see strong value in the long, replayable RPG and convenient legal access; others think the barebones port, missing online play, and separate-version pricing make $20 feel steep.