Let's talk about Pokémon designs

For that matter, the Fairy type is, for the most part, themed around being deceptively cute
Fake Tears is still Dark, though. However, this would be a sensible explanation for:
And I still haven't touched on Pokemon that make you go "what the shit are you doing in the Fairy club". [...] And Mawile is another can of worms.
My other guess would be Mawile's folkloric origin (personally I find its Steel typing odder); but then again, there doesn't seem to be a strict yōkai/mythical being ⇔ Fairy type relation.
 
My other guess would be Mawile's folkloric origin (personally I find its Steel typing odder); but then again, there doesn't seem to be a strict yōkai/mythical being ⇔ Fairy type relation.
Yeah, I've read Bulbapedia's Origin of Species too -- in general yokai don't seem to tie themselves to any typing (see: Golduck, Ludicolo, Slowpoke. Wait...it's Water?!). So I thought about it and concluded that the Steel-type is definitely the weirder half. Obviously though -- as most people would be able to guess -- my complaint is that Mawile was definitely first designed with the Dark-type in mind. You'd most likely be lying if you claim to have nailed Mawile's typing at first guess.

It has nothing to do with how it's grey-black -- color is far from the biggest indicator. It's the concept, the concept of a Deceiver Pokemon (yes, that's its species name) that fits so well with the Dark/Evil-type thematically. Recalling, as countless others on the internet have before, that the Dark-type is based on trickery and deceit, Mawile's design does something that very few of the other Dark-type designs do -- it plainly communicates that the Pokemon is up to some nasty tactics. Innocent little girl on one side, massive snapping jaw hair on the other.

Contrast this with say Honchkrow/Krookodile/Pangoro, which rely on visual allusions to crime bosses (hat/shades/coat), or Weavile/Liepard/Malamar, which with a quick palette swap could lead you to believe they were of different types (say, Normal/Normal/Water respectively). Mawile, conversely, could have its jaw hair recolored to neon green and the theme of deceit would still shine through.

My main gripe, like with Blissey, is that they wasted a type's design archetype on a different typing altogether (whew!), and it's just such a shame. Do I acknowledge that Blissey has a difficult case for already being the premier special wall? Sure. God forbid I suggest something like lower its base stats! We gotta have the typing make sense somehow!, but I think it's certainly something regrettable on the designers' part.

For a bonus -- look at Mawile's movepool! Our monster girl boasts 15 Dark-type moves, 4 Steel-type moves and 3 Fairy-type moves (all discounting Hidden Power). Thinking logically, this probably stems from the fact that while Mawile's concept does include being deceptively cute to qualify as a Fairy-type, it's also a physical attacker with a grand total of 1 move to choose from the physical Fairy movepool. Maybe if the options expand for Mawile I'll be happier, but at the moment I'll continue furrowing my brows at one of the most blatant mis-typings in Pokemon.

I'll soon get to Dedenne, which I still think is an exemplar of poor design choices.
 
Knowing Nidoking looks like some movie monster is actually making me like it more. That thing is awesome looking, and even if it's clearly based off it the design is still pretty cool.

I'd photoshop Nidoking's face on but I'm lazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JES

Cresselia~~

Junichi Masuda likes this!!
PokeJungle wrote a theory on how Lunala may be inspired by the Egyptian goddess Isis (not to be confused with ISIS)
Because: With Solgaleo being clearly related to this alchemical symbol, I began to wonder the significance of the moon in Alchemy and if Lunala could fit into this theory. There is a lot of speculation around what Lunala is based around. Lions are often associated with the sun and masculine energy, so Solgaleo is an obvious connection—Lunala, not so much. Surprisingly, I found a possible inspiration for Lunala that fits into Alchemy: the Egyptian Goddess, Isis (Pictured Below). Isis was a goddess often associated with the moon, portrayed with long wings and horns on her head. She was also the goddess of magic and Alchemy. Further, in Egyptian mythology, Isis is known for raising her husband from the dead, garnering her the title: the protector of the dead. If Lunala is based off Isis, this title of “protector of the dead” could attribute to its Ghost typing. With Lunala likely being based of a goddess of the moon and alchemy, both box legendaries obviously have some sort of ties to Alchemy.


I think the theory is quite interesting. The head does look like Lunala.
 
it's also a physical attacker with a grand total of 1 move to choose from the physical Fairy movepool
Play Rough is the only physical Fairy-type move in the game, though. I too think Mawile definitely feels more Dark than Steel despite its "steel horns", but ultimately it's the designers' choice, I guess (and it doesn't prevent it being among my all-time favourite Pokémon, either base or mega).

As for Dedenne, I think the main problem is how similar to Raichu it looks, but then again a Raichu lookalike is kind of a novelty among the pikaclones. I also overall don't mind having a pikaclone per generation, since from a real-world perspective they could all be perceived as related species which I feels adds some depth.

The head does look like Lunala.
Isn't that a sun disc, though? (Note: I know pretty much nothing about Egyptian mythology.)
 
Whimsicott is a natural prankster (typical fairy trait) and also possibly inspired by a Brazilian folk spirit, so it definitely makes sense. I too think having Lilligant being part-Fairy would've made sense, but it is possible it was conceived as a generic "elegant flower lady" instead of a "flower fairy" (and cases like Milotic (possibly mermaid- ⇒ myth-inspired) make clear that elegant ⇏ Fairy).
 
I honestly don't see too much of a common theme about Fairies. Sure there are some recurring tropes but not a single common one.

Let's look at what we go:
- Mighty forest spirit (Xerneas, Geomancy)
- Mischievous prankster (Whimsicott, Klefki)
- Bundle of cuteness/pinkness (Sylveon, Clefable, Wigglytuff, Baby-doll Eyes)
- Feminine elegance (Gardevoir)
- Happiness and care (Togekiss, Mega Audino)
- Deceitful monster (Mawile)
- Moon-related (Clefable, Moonblast, Moonlight)

Of course this is not a complete list but it gives the idea. Fairies share some traits but there isn't a common ground to all of them. There are many potential Fairy retypes that didn't happen, yeah, but overall I don't think anything that is somewhat cute/feminine/myth oriented should be retyped to Fairy.

Take Water: most Water-Types are based on marine organisms, but not all of them (Suicune, Simipour) and there are some marine-inspired Pokémon that are not part Water (Stunfisk, Malamar).
 
Last page I linked a video with "Pokemon Ondo" on it to emphasize that pokemon are not only japanese but designed to appeal to a japanese audience first and foremost; now you might argue that, but considering what we'll uncover about many pokemon designs further down the line (not to mention certain decisions about gen VII in response to Yokai Watch that shall go unmentioned) I think this'll prove to be quite accurate

(and after this post you might want to play Pokemon Ondo again)

so first the good news, many design choices by Gamefreak that seem bizarre not only do make sense but are actually quite nice when taken into cultural context, now this isn't true about every pokemon some designs are actually underappreciated because they're well researched and fairly clever and, well let's just say the Gamefreak staff is fairly well educated as well

an example of one of these designs that's obscure even if you happen to be japanese or you know into kaiju and stuff is:

if you ever wondered why Yamask evolved into a sarcophagus, the answer becomes simple once you know what Yamask actually is; Yamask has 3 main elements in it's design the more obvious being this:



this is a death mask, they were used in the mummification process and were believed to strengthen the spirit of the mummy and guard the soul from evil spirits on its way to the afterlife, as you can see is blantanly refencing a big element of egyptian rites

the second element of it's design is Yamask "arms", many people have complained about them seeing them as superfluos but if you looks closely at the eye of horus


can you see the "arm"? you can also kinda see Yamask's head, and speaking of it's head

the final element of its design is Yamask's head wich looks like a bird, this is intentional you see one of the elements of the soul in egyptian religion was the ba, wich was represented as a bird with a human head, in Yamask this is reversed
http://www.kingtutone.com/ancient-egypt/ba-ka/

neat huh?

now originally this post is waaaaaaaaaaaay longer but in order not to break the forums while trying to post it again I'll cover most of the "japaneseness" of Gamefreaks designs on the following post(s)

but not before we look into how Gamefreak's designs depend on being japanese to be understood not only for species but for mechanics

for example we all know the type chart can be a bit.... unintuitive yet it's suppoused to be logical enough that any child should understand it as demostrated by the starters; well it becomes a bit more logical (a bit) when we look at the original japanese names

Dark for example is originaly Evil and some decisions about effectiveness make more sense when looked as Evil, why would be a Ghost be afraid of the Dark? it wouldn't, but ghosts (in japanese mythology) are easly corrupted by Evil, same with Fairy as fairies with their pure hearts are not easily corrupted by Evil
but if we do this we come to an obvious problem, why would be a Bug good at fighting Evil? and the obvious answear would be rider kick



that guy up there is Kamen Rider he's a cybernetic mutant grasshopper and if there's any equivalenet to Superman in japanese culture it's him, and of course he's good at fighting Evil! this also explains why Fighting is good against Dark/Evil all tokusatsu heroes fight evil with martial arts! (and the occasional magic sword/giant robot)



man look at this thing, it's ridiculously long and I'm not even half way done see you next post
 
Last edited:


Remember when I said a banshee Pokemon would be awesome? We sort of already have one... that didn't become a Fairy. Mismagius is the Magical Pokemon. Its head looks like a witch's hat, and its Dex entries state that its incantations can cause torment or happiness... just like casting a spell. Now, what is it that practically every folktale fairy, from the adorable to the nightmare fuel, has in common? Practically all of them have to do with magic in one way or another. It would certainly make sense for it to become Ghost/Fairy, given its obvious magical nature. Resisting Dark and having STAB Dazzling Gleam would also be cool.
I've been a bit conflicted in my view of Mismagius over the years. I find it falls in to that category of pokemon that conceptually are pretty awesome, but in practice doesn't really deliver what it's description implies. I don't think Fairy classification would necessarily fit as it does fall more of a 'dark' type -- however I was hopeful that a typing redistribution to Ghost/fairy or Dark/Fairy would have provided access to some unique moves/combinations. As much as I keep going back to Mismagius but yet remain equally critical of how she fits compared to other (sometimes more effective pokemon of the similar type) I often see her cast aside against Gengar. To me, i see them played differently to be at their most effective, but anyway, I digress.

Going back to CRoll's initial post and his intent with the thread...

What makes a good/bad Pokémon design to you?

My definition of good/bad would have changed across the generation -- as the pool of pokemon to choose from has increased I certainly feel that my perception has shifted from appearance/movepool to typing. In Gen I when this pool was relatively small I recall the move-pools being very comparable in terms of effectiveness (against different types) and damage and found I could get away with going for a pokemon whose appearance I preferred given that everything was the same type. As the generations continued (bar gen 3, which i never played) I felt I placed greater stock in the typing as opposed to the appearance after so many let downs (looking at you, Infernape).

Nowadays, my view of 'good' design would be something where the typing is thoughtful and the movepool is very broad. Regarding typing, I always found Altaria a good example -- your first instinct is often bird --> flies --> flying --> electric counter. However, in its mega form, it completely drops the flying/dragon for dragon/fairy, which gives you the option to render an electric counter somewhat ineffective. I don't hold Alteria to high regard, nor am I implying it is necessarily a 'good' pokemon -- but the typing change is quite awesome and can save you in a pinch and gets to what I was implying.

Conversely, a 'bad' pokemon in my view is typically the more lazy ones we are presented with where they look like a gimmick and don't really have any type or movepool advantages. I tend to be quite critical of these so I can't speak educatedly about what one would be -- at a stab, i'd say the whole vanillite line.

Are there any Pokémon designs you like or dislike for specific reasons? Can you point out exactly what the designers did right/wrong?

I could go on for a while, but feel this would be a highly subjective response so i'll keep my view short and sharp -- vanillite, klefki, etc, as far as pokemon themselves go. I would say typing is also affected here... there are some times that I feel and observe, are left behind -- such as the Ice type. Just as fairy was a game-changer against Dragon type pokemon I feel it would be great if the other types had a small shake-up every now and then. Keeps it fresh and hopefully brings some forgotten pokemon back to relevance.
How do other aspects of the Pokémon work with or against the design? Can movepool, abilities, lore or the design basis affect the way you view a Pokémon design? That is, can it ruin an otherwise good design, or remedy a bad one?

I appreciate the visual design of most pokemon, I think they each have their place in the Pokemon Universe and provide some diversity/variety. I think that the more technical aspects can remedy a bad -- but I must admit, I do groan occasionally when you have pokemon that look awesome, have stats (height/weight, etc) that are impressive but in battle it just doesn't materialise. For a good pokemon (in-game/battling) I think poor visual design, lack of lore, etc. are disappointing at worse but for an average/bad pokemon the lack of anything else to make you like it, beyond personal preference, is just a disappointment.

Some examples that come to mind are the Dark pokemon types, their descriptions/bios are pretty spooky yet in battle they don't invoke any fear -- not visually -- but based on typing/movepool.
For a long time, we've been used to see Pokémon in sprites only, but now 3D models have entered the main series games (console games nonwithstanding). Do you think some Pokémon made this transition better or worse than others? Were Pokémon troubled by bad sprites finally justified when seen in glorious 3D? Or did the 3D transition reveal that the Pokémon only looked good in specific poses from specific angles?

I can't recall any which have received poor treatment in the jump to 3D, there are obviously some which fared better than others but I hadn't paid much attention, really.
 
Last time on japanese influenced pokemon designs

we didn't go into japanese inflenced pokemon designs


now let's look at some designs that are based on popular (in japan) tv shows

let's start with one whose 3d representation has left people with a bad taste on their mouths pretty much because they didn't know why it moved the way it moved
well not so much moved as the way it flew

theres this flying model
that's disliked
by ma-ny

but it doesn't matter
cause it belooongs
to Salamenceeeee

he's a flying pokemon that's very popular
but many people seem to think that he's just a dragon

the reality is more interesting than that
he's not just a salamander either cause
he's based on a legenday hero
well known all o-ver japan

he has the power of a devil
cause Go Nagai is a crazy man
this hee-ro flies just like that

Devilman

Devilman!


so in case you where distracted by my stupid awesome lyrics, the reason why Salamence's wings look so stiff when it's flying is because Devilman's wings also where stiff when he flew, it's not being lazy it's a reference cause Salemence is devilmandragon

now let's look at a design that people get, but they don't get fully



so everyone knows that Tyranitar is the Godzilla pokemon and while this is true there's more to its design
first Tyranitar not only resembles Godzilla it also looks like the ultra monster Red King



(no I don't know why Red King isn't red, it's kaiju just roll with it)
but that's not all if we look at Larvitar



you can see it's Guiron from the gamera series

the Tyranitar line doesn't just take inspiration from the king of all monsters but from ALL of the monsters!
Tyranitar is the kaiju pokemon


and speaking of kaiju

who's that pokemon?



it's Takkong!




it's Gomora!

and while I've yet to find any coincidences for stuff like Alakazam or Magmar I'm pretty sure they're also based on some kaiju or tokusastu monster (Electabuzz might be based on Eleking but it only shares the its colour and stripes so I dont think so)

Ok I'm gonna stop here before I go way overboard

next time we'll be examining real animals and how culture influences how you think of them and how an obscure animal in one part of the world might be well know elsewhere
Oh you did remenber to play Pokemon Ondo whie reading this right? can't go wrong with an ondo with these posts you know
 
Last edited:
Last time on japanese influenced pokemon designs

we didn't go into japanese inflenced pokemon designs


now let's look at some designs that are based on popular (in japan) tv shows

let's start with one whose 3d representation has left people with a bad taste on their mouths pretty much because they didn't know why it moved the way it moved
well not so much moved as the way it flew

theres this flying model
that's disliked
by ma-ny

but it doesn't matter
cause it belooongs
to Salamenceeeee

he's a flying pokemon that's very popular
but many people seem to think that he's just a dragon

the reality is more interesting than that
he's not just a salamander either cause
he's based on a legenday hero
well known all o-ver japan

he has the power of a devil
cause Go Nagai is a crazy man
this hee-ro flies just like that

Devilman

Devilman!


so in case you where distracted by my stupid awesome lyrics, the reason why Salamence's wings look so stiff when it's flying is because Devilman's wings also where stiff when he flew, it's not being lazy it's a reference cause Salemence is devilmandragon

now let's look at a design that people get, but they don't get fully



so everyone knows that Tyranitar is the Godzilla pokemon and while this is true there's more to its design
first Tyranitar not only resembles Godzilla it also looks like the ultra monster Red King



(no I don't know why Red King isn't red, it's kaiju just roll with it)
but that's not all if we look at Larvitar



you can see it's Guiron from the gamera series

the Tyranitar line doesn't just take inspiration from the king of all monsters but from ALL of the monsters!
Tyranitar is the kaiju pokemon


and speaking of kaiju

who's that pokemon?



it's Takkong!




it's Gomora!

and while I yet to find any coincidences for stuff like Alakazam or Magmar I'm pretty sure they're also based on some kaiju or tokusastu monster (Electabuzz might be based on Eleking but it only shares the its colour and stripes so I dont think so)

Ok I'm gonna stop here before I go way overboard

next time we'll be examining real animals and how culture influences how you think of them and how an obscure animal in one part of the world might well know elsewhere
Oh you did remenber to play Pokemon Ondo whie reading this right? can't go wrong with an ondo with these posts you know
These posts are awesome! Sorry nothing else to add, just felt you deserved more than a like, I'm getting an education
 
These posts are awesome! Sorry nothing else to add, just felt you deserved more than a like, I'm getting an education
*rolls around on the floor giggling like a maniac*
-insert Maxie composing himself animation here-
thank you for the compliment!

as we've seen Gamefreak is heavily biased towards old science fiction shows in its designs but it's not just old shows (and well movies I guess) in wich Gamefreak tends to be japanocentric, is animals as well

the most well known example of this is Seadra who as everyone and their mother knows evolves into a dragon because the word for seahorse in japanese is tatsu no otoshigo which literally means illegitimate child of a dragon; now this shows us that a lot of the designs are based on japanese puns, and the reason for this is that most of japanese humor is also based on puns, mostly because japanese (and chinese) has a lot of homophones and alternate character reading (don't ask)
this is also why Ampharos mega-evolves into a dragon cause the denryu for electrical current in its name has the character for ryu which is another way of saying dragon

now Gamefreak also utilizes animals that seem obscure to us, for example Manaphy is a clione, a rather obscure type of sea slug



(just picture Manaphy upside down, no I don't know why Gamefreak drew it upside down)
but the funny thing is that what animals tend to be obscure depends on what part of the world you live, and in japan they're (or where) popular as mascots and and pets


also ever wonder why Manaphy's signature move is Heart Swap? looking at a typical cartoon of a clione

we see what Gamefreak might have been inspired by


and of course we couldn't forget Wooper



Looper



axolotls are (somewhat) obscure in most of the world but as we see here they where quite fashionable in japan once!

of course while this means that we'll get to see all kids of rarely seen and fairly exclusively represented pokemon species in the west, it also means you shouldn't hold your breath for a turkey or possum pokemon (specially not a possum, is a fairly exclusively united states species, I didn't even know about them for years!) since species such as those are pretty obscure in the japan also screw dolphins discounting of course species that the Geamefreak staff happens to like on a personal level

Ok now that we seen the good it's time to cover the bad, pokemon designs that seem less impressive once you've discovered their japanese origins

until then
ohman likes before I even finish the post
 
Last edited:
It's interesting to see someone elaborate on the origin of "goofy" or "quirky" Pokémon designs. I knew some of these already, but not the kaiju-based designs. No wonder Haxorus seemed like one of those original weirdos at first.
 
I have an odd taste of designs. For instance, my favourite Pokemon are usually follow one of these guidelines:
  1. Somewhat fitting in Norse mythology (for instance, I think Abomasnow is practically a perfect Jotun) And yes, I know this doesn't have much to do with design, but for me it matters... a lot.
  2. Has a creepy or otherworldly factor. Sableye, Gothitelle, Jellicent, Porygon, Ditto, Klefki.... I could go on and on.
  3. I hate to say it, but a lot of my favourites are also green. Wow, I sound biased.
  4. Have an interestingly highlighted section of their body. Clawitzer and Megas Sableye, Slowbro and Mawile come to mind.
  5. I don't exactly know how to describe the kind of thing that makes me like these Pokemon's designs, so I'll just name the Pokemon: Swadloon, Gulpin, Swinub, etc. I guess it's the kind of helpless or sad look. I also dig a malevolent look, that I think Malamar pulls off well.
  6. Have horns. Basically, if you A) Have prominent horns and B) are a Pokemon, you won't be disliked by me.
Morale of the story: Until a Pokemon that follows all these guidelines comes out, I won't have a mascot.
 
Last edited:
Yeah the 2D to 3D transition helped many pokemon, but not all of them. Some of them just looked better back when they were just animation less sprites, thus were designed to look good without the need to move and in specific poses. Here are some examples of pokemon that to me suffered with the transition to 3D
Seviper
Before
Seviper has always looked good in 2D thanks to its unique pose and a design that was made to look good in this specific pose, until gen 6 happened.
After
Poor Seviper, its pose just doesn't work anymore in 3D, now it looks unnatural and really forced, but if you think twice, it also wouldn't look well in any other pose because it would make him look more of a generic snake rather than a Seviper, which has always been recogized by its pose, so it didn't had many options.
Skarmory
Before
It is funny to see that despite being a flying type bird, Skarmory has always looked better on the ground and in some very specific poses such as this one, which looks imposing and powerfull (which is not really the case with an 80 attack stat lol).
After
Why Game Freak why? This is when I discovered how Skarmory looked better on the ground, here without its wings opened towards the opponent, like it was before, makes it looks far less menacing and makes its wings look like sheets of paper, but unfortunately it HAD to be flying on its 3D model to be able to participate in sky battles.
Raticate
Before
Despite not being a fan of Raticate's design, I think its 2D sprites have always looked fine, maybe because it was an easier design to replicate into 2D sprites, which is not the case with the 3D model.
After
Holy Arceus...Raticate just wasn't made to be seen in 3D. Now its limbs are almost nonexistent because it doesn't have neither arms or legs, which wasn't really a problem for its sprites for some reason and its pose doesn't look good and is just feels unnatural to me.
Muk
Before
I think I am one of the few ones who actually like Muk's design, but maybe because its 2D sprites have always looked right. It had a pretty menacing face and I always liked the fact that one arm was bigger than the other one.
After
This model made me understand why some people don't like its design. It just looks dopey now with that derpy face and its constantly "melting" body, and for some reason they made its arms have the same size thus making its design less original.
Honorable mentions
Tropius
It is essentially the exact same case as Skarmory.
Feraligatr
It just doesn't seem very mobile in 3D
Onix
I can't really tell why, but it looks much less huge on its 3D model.

Well then, that wasn't all terrible tho, some Pokémon actually looked the same as always or even better in 3D, just like Charizard. Thanks for reading, and sorry for my english, it is not my home lenguage.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I think quite a few look worse with the new 3D models. You can see in the examples above that a lot of colors got duller, and the 2D models had nice contour lines or shadows that sharpened how their designs looked. And then, obviously, the changed poses (usually to meet the need of having the 3D ones continuously moving) hurt a lot of them, including by obscuring features of some designs (like Skarmory's above). (Also, the dulling of the purple streak on Seviper is just baffling.)
 
Why Game Freak why? This is when I discovered how Skarmory looked better on the ground, here without its wings opened towards the opponent, like it was before, makes it looks far less menacing and makes its wings look like sheets of paper, but unfortunately it HAD to be flying on its 3D model to be able to participate in sky battles.
I think that could have been "solved" by having all Pokemon eligible for Sky Battles have an idle pose where they are on the ground, for other battles. Well, at least for those that could be on the ground. At least these awkward poses would not be seen all the time.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)

Top