Pokémon designs are incredibly varied in their shapes sizes and inspirations and as a fan of the series, I'm always interested to learn about the overall process of creating Pokémon. What does Game Freak look for in a Pokémon? How do they decide where to put them? What ideas inspired them? What happens to the Pokémon designs that were rejected? I find that learning the answers to such questions only increases my appreciation of the series. It may not answer every question we could have, but we can gain quite a bit of insight of the process through Game Freak's interviews. So I would like to share all of the information I could find on the topic and hopefully help a few of you, who may have had a passing curiosity of the process, to understand a bit of Game Freak's mentality and approach to designs. Maybe you'll be like me and find yourself appreciating Pokémon more, I'd like to think so anyway.
So starting off, there is a misconception that appears every now and then, and that is the assumption that Ken Sugimori personally designed all of the original 151 Pokémon. While it is true that all characters and Pokémon are drawn in his art style, he did not design all 151 of the Kanto Pokémon, it was a team of under ten people including Sugimori. Game Freak uses a rotating group of people of varying number each generation of Pokémon, some may be veterans and some maybe first-timers, but they all come up with designs and submit them to be approved. The Iwata Asks for Pokémon Black and White delves into this a bit more.
Iwata Asks: Pokémon Black and White
http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/ds/pokemon-black-white/0/1
So each gen a group of people with various experiences with Pokémon, some even long time fans, with various likes, dislikes, skills and frames of reference all contribute to making Pokémon. They are always thinking about what kind of ecosystem they want and how to balance out the kind of Pokémon found there. By going to zoos and aquariums and using real life as a base, Game Freak challenges themselves to be creative and surprise fans. As long as it is approved and drawn by Sugimori, it becomes a Pokémon. Which is why Sugimori can afford to encourage the designers to test the bounds of what a Pokémon can be. Since there were both veteran designers and Pokémon fans in the group, they may have had limited ideas of what a Pokémon can be, and challenging those ideas allow Pokémon to be as varied as they are.
We can get a few more details from some of James Turner's tweets:
So when a design concept is submitted and approved, it must then be drawn in greater detail as a reference sheet, this is probably what Sugimori meant when he said he would draw them in various perspectives and unify the designs, he would probably use the reference of the designers before drawing the final artwork. Also, while the designers are to come up with the Pokémon themselves, they are sometimes told to design with a purpose in mind. As James Turner said, Poipole was briefed to him by the planners, and he answers a fan question, he explains that while he came up with the design and concept, it was already decided that the Pokémon was going to be a Poison type Ultra Beast. James also talks a bit about his work on Black and White in a interview after their release in Japan:
(It's in Japanese, but I'll leave the link in case some are interested.) https://web.archive.org/web/20130115083652/http://www.gamefreak.co.jp/blog/staff/?p=204
Unfortunately it's not translated as far as I know, and I hesitate to share too much with Google Translate since it's not very accurate most of the time. I only bring it up because even with Google Translate there is another example of being requested certain Pokémon. James explains that since he joined the designers a little later, he wasn't able to submit his own Pokémon ideas like most graphic designers and was asked to fill in the missing types. He gave the Vanillite line as an example, saying he was asked for an "Ice-type Pokémon that produces cold".
Near the release of Pokémon X and Y, Gamasutra had an interview with Hironobu Yoshida who also spoke about the design process. Yoshida also mentions he is in charge of the set-up sheets and making final adjustments to Pokémon.
Gamasutra article with Yoshida:
https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news...born_Designing_the_series_iconic_monsters.php
As mentioned before, Pokémon are submitted to be approved, by, what we now know, a committee of five people, which I'd imagine probably includes Sugimori. It seems Game Freak goes through a large amount of communication when creating Pokémon, as Yoshida stated, being able to share their designs with the team can give others ideas and prevent an overlap of ideas. It could have been assumed that there were a good amount of rejected Pokémon, if any of you have seen the beta sprites of Red and Green or the ROM demo of Gold and Silver, then you know this, but 5 to 10 times the included is more than I would've guessed. Still, the communication of all parties involved, even down to giving feedback to 5 to 10 times of Pokémon designs is another important part of the process.
Before the release of Sun and Moon, the director, Shigeru Ohmori also talked a bit about designing Pokémon. He mentioned that they come up with many ideas, some that aren't really possible to realize, but they are still shared and eventually, they narrow down the ideas that they find interesting to implement and simplify them so they can work as a Pokémon. I think this might also be where the planners find certain types of Pokémon to request. Ohmori also stated that besides animals, the region the Pokémon are in or the locations in where they are found as well as certain game mechanics or type combinations may inspire designs in a Pokémon. So some designers will think about where the Pokémon will be found, such as in a cave of near water and will come up with an idea based on that, while others think about the region itself and what Pokémon may suit it, basically they think about the ecosystem like Sugimori said in the Iwata Asks. What I find the most interesting is designing based of mechanics or battle system, because this gives new insight on past Pokémon with unusual abilities. Since designers sometimes get requests on Pokémon by planners, there could have been times where they wanted a Pokémon to use a certain mechanic. For example, if the move Sketch was created first, then a designer would create Smeargle by thinking "what kind of Pokémon could show this off?" or with the introduction of Abilities, a planner could ask for something that changes in weather (Castform) or something that looks lazy (Slakoth). Anyway, because they have so many ideas, not all will make it, but Game Freak still holds on to them and tries to find ways to make them work, which goes back to the feedback rejected designs would receive.
Digital Spy article with Ohmori:
http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/po...heres-how-the-pokemon-company-design-pokemon/
Another instance of Game Freak sharing their design process is Junichi Masuda's interview with Gameinformer. Masuda explains that while the graphic designers always finalize the look, they are not the only ones who come up with designs and those ideas could come from places like gameplay, visuals, and story. Masuda also states that they always pay attention to why a Pokémon exists, how does it live, what does it eat and to treat it like a living creature, which again goes back to the ecosystem. Any design philosophy changes is probably a result of the hardware allowing them to do new things, as Masuda points out, it was difficult to draw circles in the past (because they were developing for the Gameboy, Pokémon had to be drawn as pixels first), but now they are able to create a greater variety of facial expressions and designs.
Gameinformer article with Masuda:
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featu...how-game-freak-designs-pokemon-creatures.aspx
Ideas for Pokémon don't really get thrown away if they don't fit in one game, they can always come back, because Game Freak values new ideas. Going back to the feedback on rejected designs Yoshida mentioned, since Masuda brought up that the director of the game can make suggestions, it is possible that the committee that judges the designs would include the director of that game as well as Sugimori if not just one of them.
Here Masuda brings up a particular reason a Pokémon might get rejected and the thought process in regards to how it evolves. While Game Freak has always tested what a Pokémon can be, it is still important for them to understand how they change and why.
There is a little bit about the design of Meltan in Gamespot's Let's Go interview, basically Masuda gave directions on what he wanted and Nabana explains that they wanted to make a realistic looking object, but what I want to highlight is the response to a question about Gorochu (Pikachu's scrapped final evolution).
Gamespot article on Let's Go with Masuda and Kensaku Nabana:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/how-lets-go-pikachu-eevee-update-pokemon-yellow-fo/1100-6462538/
Like in the Game Informer interview, Masuda talks about justifying a Pokémon, I believe balance was also cited as a reason that Gorochu was cut in a different interview, but I may be mistaken. Now what I find to be interesting about this is what Masuda said about discarded designs never reappearing. Masuda himself explained that having the design process killed doesn't happen often, what usually happens is you get told how to improve certain ideas or it wouldn't work in it's current form. There was a beta Ruby and Sapphire design that looked like a cross between Blaziken and Latias.
So it does seem like Game Freak is fine revisiting ideas, so why say they don't reappear? This is speculation, but I think it can be explained; whenever a design is rejected at first then reworked into something else that does get approved, in Game Freak's, or at least Masuda's eyes, they're not the same Pokémon. It would give some insight into the perception of beta designs like the balloon looking Pokémon, Barunda, that didn't make it in Red and Green, but in Gen 4 we got a balloon Pokémon Drifloon, they seem to be based on the same idea, but even if Drifloon is a redone Barunda, they are not the same, so Barunda didn't reappear and the same applies to the Blaziken and Latias mix. But again, that's just speculation.
Speaking of Drifloon, before the release of Diamond and Pearl, Nintendo Power did an interview with Game Freak about the development of the game.
Nintendo Power interview with Masuda, Sugimori, Ohmori, and Takao Unno
https://imgur.com/a/kkZqB#r4NKfxm
There is quite a bit of information here, we get to learn about how Sugimori and Unno themselves like to design Pokémon, Masuda mentioning how Shellos couldn't fit in Hoenn, but made it in Sinnoh, Dialga and Palkia being designed after sharing ideas with each other, how they decide on the number and what Pokémon to evolve, with Ohmori seemingly responsible for some unexpected cross-gen Evolutions. The main takeaway, I feel, is how much balance and gameplay can influence Pokémon. In Diamond and Pearl's case, about half the Pokémon were suggested by planners and included for strategic balance to the point where the strongest Pokémon in each type (I assume that's what they mean by "class") were design first. Since Diamond and Pearl are the games that introduced the Physical/Special split, the planning team might have had to think what moves this changes, exactly how all the past Pokémon will be played, which of the Pokémon would the split benefit the most, and how will the player be approaching the game now, so it makes sense that the planners would have a lot of ideas. Not only that, it also extends to deciding on Evolutions. What kind of Pokémon would evolve? How many will evolve? What does it evolving mean for balance? Just the act of thinking about the mechanics of a game lends itself to Pokémon designs.
The last one I'd like to share is this translated interview with Sugimori that comes from the Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon Essential Setting Information book:
https://www.siliconera.com/2018/07/...e-pokmon-by-adding-uncool-or-uncute-features/
Based on the Iwata Asks and the Nintendo Power interview, Sugimori seems to be incredibly conscious of the possibility that a Pokémon may not look like a Pokémon to some people, but he still wants to surprise people and test the bounds of what a Pokémon can be even encouraging others to do the same. In the Nintendo Power interview Sugimori states that he designs Pokémon to look awkward on purpose, and doing so with the intention of having it grow on a person, so in the end, that Pokémon will look like a Pokémon to them. This interview for the Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon book, shows what goes on in Sugimori's head as he continues to design Pokémon that way. Keeping a balance between "cool" and "cute", "serious" and "cheerful" must be what Sugimori believes makes a Pokémon, a Pokémon. As he said though, what is cool or not is subjective, but Sugimori seems to value "imperfections" in Pokémon, enough to even strongly insist that Oshawott keeps its freckles (a decision I support, I like the freckles), all for the purpose of making a Pokémon more memorable than it might have been otherwise. I can't help but really appreciate how Sugimori approaches Pokémon designs, I have never thought to myself "that doesn't look like a Pokémon", but I have had certain ones grow on me as time passes and I believe that to be part of Pokémon's charm. Sugimori's designing Pokémon to be awkward at first and his balancing touch-ups are probably part of what allows that to happen.
Throughout all the interviews, it is clear the incredible amount of time and effort Game Freak puts to making Pokémon. They always have a rotating staff of designers composed of veterans and newcomers, all communicating with each other and sharing ideas to submit to a committee to be approved, but not just them, planners can request certain designs based around things like story, mechanics, and gameplay balance. Game Freak has to consider how a Pokémon fits in the region and how it lives, and even if it doesn't work, the ideas are rarely thrown out and can be reworked based on feedback for the future. While doing this, Game Freak continues to challenge their designers to surprise players and test the bounds of what makes a Pokémon, as long as they are drawn by Sugimori, the design will become Pokémon and is unified with the others. This long and thorough process is not only how Game Freak manages to make their Pokémon feel different from one another, but also make entire regions feel different. If Pokémon are designed with the ecosystem in mind, then it naturally gives each region its own distinct feel. Yet, even with all these different designs made by different people with different likes and dislikes, ideas, skills, and backgrounds, they all still give the vibe of Pokémon, at least to me. Anyway, this is all I was able to find about how Game Freak designs their Pokémon, if you didn't know many details about this, I hope it was interesting for you, maybe it even made you appreciate the Pokémon designs we have more. Honestly, I'm having a harder time now even imagining a day when Game Freak actually runs out of ideas. Also if you happen to find something interesting about the process or an interview that I might have missed, feel free to share it, if possible, I'd like this thread to be a compilation of interviews about designing Pokémon.
So starting off, there is a misconception that appears every now and then, and that is the assumption that Ken Sugimori personally designed all of the original 151 Pokémon. While it is true that all characters and Pokémon are drawn in his art style, he did not design all 151 of the Kanto Pokémon, it was a team of under ten people including Sugimori. Game Freak uses a rotating group of people of varying number each generation of Pokémon, some may be veterans and some maybe first-timers, but they all come up with designs and submit them to be approved. The Iwata Asks for Pokémon Black and White delves into this a bit more.
Iwata Asks: Pokémon Black and White
http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/ds/pokemon-black-white/0/1
So each gen a group of people with various experiences with Pokémon, some even long time fans, with various likes, dislikes, skills and frames of reference all contribute to making Pokémon. They are always thinking about what kind of ecosystem they want and how to balance out the kind of Pokémon found there. By going to zoos and aquariums and using real life as a base, Game Freak challenges themselves to be creative and surprise fans. As long as it is approved and drawn by Sugimori, it becomes a Pokémon. Which is why Sugimori can afford to encourage the designers to test the bounds of what a Pokémon can be. Since there were both veteran designers and Pokémon fans in the group, they may have had limited ideas of what a Pokémon can be, and challenging those ideas allow Pokémon to be as varied as they are.
We can get a few more details from some of James Turner's tweets:
So when a design concept is submitted and approved, it must then be drawn in greater detail as a reference sheet, this is probably what Sugimori meant when he said he would draw them in various perspectives and unify the designs, he would probably use the reference of the designers before drawing the final artwork. Also, while the designers are to come up with the Pokémon themselves, they are sometimes told to design with a purpose in mind. As James Turner said, Poipole was briefed to him by the planners, and he answers a fan question, he explains that while he came up with the design and concept, it was already decided that the Pokémon was going to be a Poison type Ultra Beast. James also talks a bit about his work on Black and White in a interview after their release in Japan:
(It's in Japanese, but I'll leave the link in case some are interested.) https://web.archive.org/web/20130115083652/http://www.gamefreak.co.jp/blog/staff/?p=204
Unfortunately it's not translated as far as I know, and I hesitate to share too much with Google Translate since it's not very accurate most of the time. I only bring it up because even with Google Translate there is another example of being requested certain Pokémon. James explains that since he joined the designers a little later, he wasn't able to submit his own Pokémon ideas like most graphic designers and was asked to fill in the missing types. He gave the Vanillite line as an example, saying he was asked for an "Ice-type Pokémon that produces cold".
Near the release of Pokémon X and Y, Gamasutra had an interview with Hironobu Yoshida who also spoke about the design process. Yoshida also mentions he is in charge of the set-up sheets and making final adjustments to Pokémon.
Gamasutra article with Yoshida:
https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news...born_Designing_the_series_iconic_monsters.php
As mentioned before, Pokémon are submitted to be approved, by, what we now know, a committee of five people, which I'd imagine probably includes Sugimori. It seems Game Freak goes through a large amount of communication when creating Pokémon, as Yoshida stated, being able to share their designs with the team can give others ideas and prevent an overlap of ideas. It could have been assumed that there were a good amount of rejected Pokémon, if any of you have seen the beta sprites of Red and Green or the ROM demo of Gold and Silver, then you know this, but 5 to 10 times the included is more than I would've guessed. Still, the communication of all parties involved, even down to giving feedback to 5 to 10 times of Pokémon designs is another important part of the process.
Before the release of Sun and Moon, the director, Shigeru Ohmori also talked a bit about designing Pokémon. He mentioned that they come up with many ideas, some that aren't really possible to realize, but they are still shared and eventually, they narrow down the ideas that they find interesting to implement and simplify them so they can work as a Pokémon. I think this might also be where the planners find certain types of Pokémon to request. Ohmori also stated that besides animals, the region the Pokémon are in or the locations in where they are found as well as certain game mechanics or type combinations may inspire designs in a Pokémon. So some designers will think about where the Pokémon will be found, such as in a cave of near water and will come up with an idea based on that, while others think about the region itself and what Pokémon may suit it, basically they think about the ecosystem like Sugimori said in the Iwata Asks. What I find the most interesting is designing based of mechanics or battle system, because this gives new insight on past Pokémon with unusual abilities. Since designers sometimes get requests on Pokémon by planners, there could have been times where they wanted a Pokémon to use a certain mechanic. For example, if the move Sketch was created first, then a designer would create Smeargle by thinking "what kind of Pokémon could show this off?" or with the introduction of Abilities, a planner could ask for something that changes in weather (Castform) or something that looks lazy (Slakoth). Anyway, because they have so many ideas, not all will make it, but Game Freak still holds on to them and tries to find ways to make them work, which goes back to the feedback rejected designs would receive.
Digital Spy article with Ohmori:
http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/po...heres-how-the-pokemon-company-design-pokemon/
Another instance of Game Freak sharing their design process is Junichi Masuda's interview with Gameinformer. Masuda explains that while the graphic designers always finalize the look, they are not the only ones who come up with designs and those ideas could come from places like gameplay, visuals, and story. Masuda also states that they always pay attention to why a Pokémon exists, how does it live, what does it eat and to treat it like a living creature, which again goes back to the ecosystem. Any design philosophy changes is probably a result of the hardware allowing them to do new things, as Masuda points out, it was difficult to draw circles in the past (because they were developing for the Gameboy, Pokémon had to be drawn as pixels first), but now they are able to create a greater variety of facial expressions and designs.
Gameinformer article with Masuda:
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featu...how-game-freak-designs-pokemon-creatures.aspx
Ideas for Pokémon don't really get thrown away if they don't fit in one game, they can always come back, because Game Freak values new ideas. Going back to the feedback on rejected designs Yoshida mentioned, since Masuda brought up that the director of the game can make suggestions, it is possible that the committee that judges the designs would include the director of that game as well as Sugimori if not just one of them.
Here Masuda brings up a particular reason a Pokémon might get rejected and the thought process in regards to how it evolves. While Game Freak has always tested what a Pokémon can be, it is still important for them to understand how they change and why.
There is a little bit about the design of Meltan in Gamespot's Let's Go interview, basically Masuda gave directions on what he wanted and Nabana explains that they wanted to make a realistic looking object, but what I want to highlight is the response to a question about Gorochu (Pikachu's scrapped final evolution).
Gamespot article on Let's Go with Masuda and Kensaku Nabana:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/how-lets-go-pikachu-eevee-update-pokemon-yellow-fo/1100-6462538/
Like in the Game Informer interview, Masuda talks about justifying a Pokémon, I believe balance was also cited as a reason that Gorochu was cut in a different interview, but I may be mistaken. Now what I find to be interesting about this is what Masuda said about discarded designs never reappearing. Masuda himself explained that having the design process killed doesn't happen often, what usually happens is you get told how to improve certain ideas or it wouldn't work in it's current form. There was a beta Ruby and Sapphire design that looked like a cross between Blaziken and Latias.
So it does seem like Game Freak is fine revisiting ideas, so why say they don't reappear? This is speculation, but I think it can be explained; whenever a design is rejected at first then reworked into something else that does get approved, in Game Freak's, or at least Masuda's eyes, they're not the same Pokémon. It would give some insight into the perception of beta designs like the balloon looking Pokémon, Barunda, that didn't make it in Red and Green, but in Gen 4 we got a balloon Pokémon Drifloon, they seem to be based on the same idea, but even if Drifloon is a redone Barunda, they are not the same, so Barunda didn't reappear and the same applies to the Blaziken and Latias mix. But again, that's just speculation.
Speaking of Drifloon, before the release of Diamond and Pearl, Nintendo Power did an interview with Game Freak about the development of the game.
Nintendo Power interview with Masuda, Sugimori, Ohmori, and Takao Unno
https://imgur.com/a/kkZqB#r4NKfxm
There is quite a bit of information here, we get to learn about how Sugimori and Unno themselves like to design Pokémon, Masuda mentioning how Shellos couldn't fit in Hoenn, but made it in Sinnoh, Dialga and Palkia being designed after sharing ideas with each other, how they decide on the number and what Pokémon to evolve, with Ohmori seemingly responsible for some unexpected cross-gen Evolutions. The main takeaway, I feel, is how much balance and gameplay can influence Pokémon. In Diamond and Pearl's case, about half the Pokémon were suggested by planners and included for strategic balance to the point where the strongest Pokémon in each type (I assume that's what they mean by "class") were design first. Since Diamond and Pearl are the games that introduced the Physical/Special split, the planning team might have had to think what moves this changes, exactly how all the past Pokémon will be played, which of the Pokémon would the split benefit the most, and how will the player be approaching the game now, so it makes sense that the planners would have a lot of ideas. Not only that, it also extends to deciding on Evolutions. What kind of Pokémon would evolve? How many will evolve? What does it evolving mean for balance? Just the act of thinking about the mechanics of a game lends itself to Pokémon designs.
The last one I'd like to share is this translated interview with Sugimori that comes from the Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon Essential Setting Information book:
https://www.siliconera.com/2018/07/...e-pokmon-by-adding-uncool-or-uncute-features/
Based on the Iwata Asks and the Nintendo Power interview, Sugimori seems to be incredibly conscious of the possibility that a Pokémon may not look like a Pokémon to some people, but he still wants to surprise people and test the bounds of what a Pokémon can be even encouraging others to do the same. In the Nintendo Power interview Sugimori states that he designs Pokémon to look awkward on purpose, and doing so with the intention of having it grow on a person, so in the end, that Pokémon will look like a Pokémon to them. This interview for the Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon book, shows what goes on in Sugimori's head as he continues to design Pokémon that way. Keeping a balance between "cool" and "cute", "serious" and "cheerful" must be what Sugimori believes makes a Pokémon, a Pokémon. As he said though, what is cool or not is subjective, but Sugimori seems to value "imperfections" in Pokémon, enough to even strongly insist that Oshawott keeps its freckles (a decision I support, I like the freckles), all for the purpose of making a Pokémon more memorable than it might have been otherwise. I can't help but really appreciate how Sugimori approaches Pokémon designs, I have never thought to myself "that doesn't look like a Pokémon", but I have had certain ones grow on me as time passes and I believe that to be part of Pokémon's charm. Sugimori's designing Pokémon to be awkward at first and his balancing touch-ups are probably part of what allows that to happen.
Throughout all the interviews, it is clear the incredible amount of time and effort Game Freak puts to making Pokémon. They always have a rotating staff of designers composed of veterans and newcomers, all communicating with each other and sharing ideas to submit to a committee to be approved, but not just them, planners can request certain designs based around things like story, mechanics, and gameplay balance. Game Freak has to consider how a Pokémon fits in the region and how it lives, and even if it doesn't work, the ideas are rarely thrown out and can be reworked based on feedback for the future. While doing this, Game Freak continues to challenge their designers to surprise players and test the bounds of what makes a Pokémon, as long as they are drawn by Sugimori, the design will become Pokémon and is unified with the others. This long and thorough process is not only how Game Freak manages to make their Pokémon feel different from one another, but also make entire regions feel different. If Pokémon are designed with the ecosystem in mind, then it naturally gives each region its own distinct feel. Yet, even with all these different designs made by different people with different likes and dislikes, ideas, skills, and backgrounds, they all still give the vibe of Pokémon, at least to me. Anyway, this is all I was able to find about how Game Freak designs their Pokémon, if you didn't know many details about this, I hope it was interesting for you, maybe it even made you appreciate the Pokémon designs we have more. Honestly, I'm having a harder time now even imagining a day when Game Freak actually runs out of ideas. Also if you happen to find something interesting about the process or an interview that I might have missed, feel free to share it, if possible, I'd like this thread to be a compilation of interviews about designing Pokémon.
Last edited:
