7/11/2021 2 Comments ID 331 through ID 333ID 331: ???It’s a cute ghost Pokemon! It’s a bit generic, in that it looks basically like a normal white ghost like you’d see on Halloween decorations, but it has some recognizably Japanese features. First, it’s wearing a hitaikakushi, an old Japanese burial bandana that’s been connected to ghosts in Japanese culture. It’s also surrounded by what look like two Hitodama, or incorporeal dead souls that light up like lanterns (essentially a Japanese version of the European Willow-O-The-Wisp). It’s not entirely clear where the hitakaikushi actually come from, or even what the correct name for them is. The hitaikakushi was probably, at least briefly, used in 17th century Japan as part of the clothes dead bodies were dressed in before they were buried, but no one's sure why a white triangle hat was worth putting on their head. Some people theorize that the triangle on the bandana was supposed to be a sort of “heaven’s crown” that showed the person had ascended to heaven; others just say that it’s pointy so it can be used to fight off bad spirits. Whatever the reason, Japanese culture often spirits of various sorts wearing this bandana. It's so common, most Japanese people probably don’t even really know what it is or why its there, but associate it with ghosts nonetheless. ID 331 also looks remarkably similar to one of the enemies in the Pocky and Rocky series, as you can see here: Pocky and Rocky, a very underrated top-down shooter, came out in 1992, so it was much earlier than Pokemon and could conceivably have inspired 331. However, I don’t think that’s likely. More plausible is that the two designers drew from the same sources and so came up with coincidentally similar designs. Pocky and Rocky is almost entirely designed around Japanese mythology, and most of the enemies in the game have something to do with Japanese myth and folktales. Given that 331 was also based on Japanese myth, its easy to see how both games could have settled on the same design. As another coincidental example, see how Animal Crossing's Wisp looks almost identical to 331 as well: Furthermore, this isn’t even the only time Pocky and Rocky’s sprites match one of these unused Pokemon. Note how Pocky and Rocky 2 had an enemy based off the Yuki Usagi, the same inspiration for ID 306: Again, it’s probably coincidental. So what’s going on with this ghost, and why is it unused? There’s are two plausible explanations for it. First, it could be a holdover from the design of Red/Green. The sprite is certainly pretty plain and a simple concept, so it could have fit in with some of the very earliest concepting for Pokemon. In fact, at a stretch, you could even imagine that this was the original idea for the generic scary ghost sprite used in the Pokemon Tower: Sure, they look different, but the basic design of their bodies are identical, and they even has a similar sort of face. I’m not completely sold on this idea, but I do think it’s at least worth thinking about. Maybe ID 331 was made as a nice version of the evil ghost? Overall, I don’t think the “holdover from R/G” theory is very plausible, given that the three Gen I Ghost Pokemon all share a similar palette and aesthetic, and two of them were designed by Tajiri really early on, which makes it unlikely they had earlier designs so drastically different. Instead, given how close 331 is to Norowara (327) and Kyonpan (324) on the Korean Index, I think it’s far more likely that it was created around the same time as they were, as part of a brainstorming session. Given how all three were probably designed by Atsuko Nishida, it was probably the case that she was given the directive to develop more ghost types for Gold and Silver, and she came up with three of them inspired by different mythology: Kyonpan was based on Chinese mythology, Norowara on voodoo, and 331 on Japanese ghosts. Kyonpan and Norowara were chosen as the best two designs, linked together in an evolutionary line, and Nishida refined and reworked their designs, while 331 was abandoned. This also explains why the spritework on 331 seems much simpler than the surrounding Pokemon: because it was abandoned, it likely never got more refinement than a first draft. It's pretty obvious to me that the reason 331 wasn’t chosen comes down to its generic design. Kyonpan isn’t just a zombie: it’s also a panda and also has a jumping theme. Norowara isn’t just a voodoo doll, but also has a plush bear look to him as well as a grin full of personality. 331 is not only straight out of Japanese mythology without a twist, but it’s so by the numbers that it almost perfectly resembles a generic enemy in a completely different video game. While I’m sure that 331 would have been refined and made more interesting had it continued to be worked on (maybe it was, and this is the early-early origin of Misdreavus?), as it is there’s no real surprise why it didn’t make it further. ID 332: KotoraThe most infamous missing number of them all! Kotora is extremely beloved in the Lost Pokemon community, and it’s not hard to see why: it’s a great design, and it’s adorable. Kotora could have easily become a recognizable star of the Gen I or II lineup, and it has become something of a mascot for all the missingnos of the early generations. Kotora was clearly popular with the Pokemon designers too, because even though it was rejected in Red/Green, they brought it back for Gold and Silver before eventually letting it go once again. In both cases, it’s likely that it was rejected because of how hard it was for it to find a unique niche in the games. First of all, to state the obvious, Kotora is based on a tiger. However, its body, based on its shape, might also be based on a Dorei bell, or an ancient earthenware bell used at Shinto shrines for ceremonies and prayer. Since the tiger is one of the twelve Chinese Zodiac signs, a good amount of these bells are made to look like tigers, and so the round shape of Kotora could intentionally be mimicking those bells. Or it just could be a cute design; who knows. Kotora was first discovered when the Spaceworld ’97 leak happened and it was found in the Pokedex along with forty other unused designs. People immediately fell in love with it. There is a ton of Kotora fanart out there, and Kotora has gained enough notoriety at this point that, out of all missing designs, it's even recognizable outside the Lost Pokemon community. (Top left is Pit Baldriz, Top Right is @kotoraganda, bottom left and the keychains in bottom right are @raciebeep. In addition, @raciebeep makes tons of cool things featuring Kotora and other Missingnos, and you should definitely look her up and support her!) After Spaceworld ’97 was uncovered and Kotora's face was seen for the first time, Helix Chamber followed up with an even more interesting discovery! When they released their find of early Red/Green backsprites, they also discovered a backsprite there that was indisputably Kotora (and its evolutionary relatives). Which means that Kotora actually predated Gold and Silver, and was a reused design from the very beginning of Pokemon. This fits: if you think about it, Kotora is a design much more in-line with the sensibilities of Gen I. It’s clearly an Animal+ design, like Seel, though at least it has its bulbous, spherical body to give it more character than Seel. It also makes sense because a tiger is a pretty obvious animal choice to base a Pokemon design on: sure, Meowth's also a a cat, but Meowth and Persian are very different designs and were taken in more of a house-cat direction than a tiger. Saying that, It was designed pretty late in Red/Green’s development, given its late Index number of 159. Interestingly, the Kotora line formed a three-way Lightning/Ice/Fire trio with the Goldeen and Ponyta lines. This isn’t apparent in the final games, because Goldeen and Ponyta lost their first evolutions by the final and Kotora was deleted completely. There's two interesting things to note about that. First, note that all three of the first stages here were brought back in Spaceworld '97, though none of them made it to the final. Significantly, Gyopin and Puchicorn were reconceived as baby Pokemon, but Kotora, despite being the same stage as them and a mirror to them, was not treated as a baby Pokemon in Spaceworld '97. Obviously, part of this is because Gyopin and Puchicorn had to be fit into existing lines and Kotora didn't, but it's also a reminder that, as originally conceived, Puchicorn and Gyopin weren't designed as baby versions. Just keep that in mind once we start talking about baby Pokemon on the list. Second, note how as late as Era 5 in Red/Green's development, they had still not conceived of the main Water/Fire/Grass triad that defines the Gen I games. The Charmander and Squirtle lines were not completed until after Kotora/Ponyta/Goldeen, and while the Bulbasaur line had been made right before it, there's no indication that Game Freak had yet considered to make Grass tie in as one of the three types that countered each other. Meanwhile, while the internal index has no examples of Grass/Water/Fire triads, Kotora/Ponyta/Goldeen fit right into a huge amount of Fire/Water (Ice)/Electric elemental triads made up to that point in development, including: Articuno, Zapdos, Moltres; Flareon, Jolteon, Vaporeon; Magmar; Buu/Junx; Electabuzz, etc (the fact that some of these are Ice and not water is a probably a hint that Ice and Water weren’t distinct types until later into development). Note that the probably-Poltoed follows directly from the Pikachu/Raichu line, was probably water type, and fits the Fire/Electric/Water ordering that the Eevee line had. The unused fighting fish Pokemon line is directly before Vulpix and could potentially be the water part of the triad as well, though it would have been out of order type-wise (though it matches the order of Goldeen/Kotora/Ponyta). In the final games, Fire/Water/Grass form a rock/paper/scissors countering system while Electric barely interacts with them. It probably wasn’t always the case. For whatever reason, it seems that late into Red/Green’s development, Game Freak decided to mix up the main elemental trio and decided that there should be a grass starter, not an electric one. That also explains why the Bellsprout and Oddish lines were the very last Pokemon developed for Red/Green: once they decided that Grass would be the third in the elemental triad, all of a sudden grass became much more important to the game’s balance, and they developed a few more so that the new elemental trio would be more obvious in gameplay, and to give Squirtle and Charmander adopters a Grass Pokemon if they needed one. Which brings us back to Kotora. We don’t know why Kotora didn’t make it to the final Red/Green, but I have three ideas of what might have happened. My first theory has to do with this elemental triad switch. When Game Freak switched the elemental triad to Water/Fire/Grass, it not only made Grass Pokemon more important to the game’s overall balance, but it also made electric Pokemon less important. Note that in the final culling of the internal index, Pikachu lost a third evolution and Kotora was completely deleted; four electric Pokemon didn’t make it, including an entire line. Meanwhile, only Cactus was deleted as far as Grass types go, Fire type only lost Ponyta’s pre-evolution, and while water lost more--Wartortle’s original evolution, Goldeen’s first evolution, the two deleted squid Pokemon, Politoed, the fighting fish—it was already a type that dominated the internal list. It seems plausible to me that Kotora was deleted because there was less need for lots of electric Pokemon in the final because they no longer fit into the central elemental mechanic in the games. On the other hand, Kotora could have been deleted simply because it was just less far along, concept-wise, than Pikachu or other comparable electric Pokemon. Kotora doesn’t have a moveset in the Red/Green data we have, which implies that they weren’t sure where it would fit in the game, or that they hadn’t yet had time to work on it. Pikachu already had a movelist in that same data, however, and if Game Freak was that far along before they started looking for Pokemon to delete, it makes sense to delete the ones that are less integrated into the game. Thirdly, I also wonder about Kotora's potential to fill a unique role, given the existence of Pikachu. All of the moves Pikachu knows Kotora could conceivably also have had, and when push came to shove, Pikachu was probably the more popular Pokemon internally. As cute as Kotora was, it couldn’t compete with what would become the mascot for the entire series. Kotora was brought back for Gold and Silver and even made it into the Spaceworld ’97 demo, which is more than we can say for ID 309, another holdover from Red/Green (though of course Politoed, another holdover, made it in as well, heavily modified). But even when it was brought back, they still may have faced the same problem of trying to make it fit a unique niche. Compare the SW ’97 movesets of both Pikachu and Kotora: Out of nine moves, Pikachu and Kotora shared four, or nearly half: Thundershock, Quick Attack, Agility, and Thunder. All of these moves are learned at a comparable level to each other. Of the other moves they don’t share, five of them fit similar roles: Pikachu has Growl and Tail Whip, while Kotora has Leer, and Pikachu has Spark (65 power, paralyzes) while Kotora has Bite (60 power, flinches). The main flavor difference between the two was that Kotora had access to Dark moves (Bite, Pursuit) while Pikachu didn’t, and Kotora has a “manipulate switching” theme going on (Pursuit, Scary Face, and Roar). Maybe these are enough differences to justify both of their existence? I feel if I were Game Freak and I needed to cut two Pokemon, Kotora and Raitora just don’t justify their worth given their movesets. There is one more sprite of Kotora found on the scratchpads, which has an updated and refined face and no thunderbolt on its belly. This at least hints that Kotora was worked on a little more after May 1998, but it’s gone by at least April 3, 1999. The lack of a thunderbolt is intriguing, but inconclusive: were they thinking about changing Kotora’s type, maybe to Normal, to give it a more definable niche? Or was this just an unfinished sketch without the thunderbolt? My bet’s on the latter, but it could really be either. We do have evidence that Kotora and Raitora were replaced by Teddiursa and Ursaring, obviously inferior Pokemon with worse designs (at least, in my opinion). Teddiursa, at least, was not built off of Kotora, but was made out of a rejected design for the original fire starter, Honoguma (that’s a story for a different entry). This is speculation, but it looks like Teddiursa was added while the team was testing out new ways of catching Pokemon, and there’s evidence in the game’s files that they had originally envisioned using the Honey mechanic, later used for Gen IV, in Generation II. My suspicion is that they added Teddiursa to the games out of an interest in experimenting with Honey and deleted Kotora and Raitora at this point to make room. By the time they realized they weren’t using honey, they didn’t have time to go back to Kotora, and everyone’s little tiger friend was lost to history. I think it’s most likely that Kotora was forgotten, but there are two theories that it was reworked and put into later generations. Some people argue that Spheal, with it’s bulbous body and surprisingly similar mouth, was a redesign of Kotora made into a seal Pokemon. Other people note that Shinx, from Gen IV, has the same typing as Kotora did and a similar flavor (an electric cat). The two look completely different, but it’s worth noting that Shinx has a similar moveset to Kotora’s—it shares Leer, Bite, Roar and Scary Face. Given that Gen IV has a lot of designs that may have been heavily reworked versions of the rejected Gen II designs (such as Tangrowth and Lickylicky) it is quite the possibility. My bet is that neither of these were directly Kotora redesigns and that the moveset similarity is a coincidence, but I think either Spheal or Shinx are plausible descendants. ID 333: RaitoraThough less well known than it’s more rotund child, Raitora is still nonetheless beloved. A grown up version of the little electric tiger, Raitora’s sprite is a bit more distinctive because its in an action pose and seems to be loving every second of it. First, a quick quibble about Raitora’s sprite. For some reason, other interpretations of Raitora, such as those done by Helix Chamber, see Raitora as less circular than Kotora and with a body that better matches that of an actual tiger. In fanmade poses, he’s often drawn with a drawn out midsection and a distinct head. I don’t see that at all here. To me, Raitora’s sprite shows it to be clearly as bulbous as Kotora, just larger and in the midst of a jump. I guess it's a matter of how you’re looking at it, but I feel like I’m seeing a different sprite than other people. Moving on from its look, Raitora is mostly interesting because of how it was seemingly two Pokemon when it was first designed, in Red/Green. There, as mentioned, the Kotora line was a three stage evolutionary line, while in Gold and Silver, Kotora and Raitora appeared alone. So what happened? And is Raitora based on the second stage, the third stage, or a mix of the two? First of all, it’s easy to imagine what happened to Raitora. Three stage lines were relatively common during the development of Red/Green, but as Atsuko Nishida has commented, they were easy to cull as the team cut the 190 Pokemon slots down to a more manageable 150 (/151). You see this all over the Red/Green beta sprites: Zubat, Psyduck, Ponyta, Pikachu, Goldeen, and Cubone at least were all part of three-stage lines before they were cut to two. Part of me wonders if one of Raitora’s evolutions was cut earlier than the rest of the line in Red/Green, and that when they were ported over to Gold/Silver they just took the two stages that had survived the longest. It’s impossible to know. But which evolutionary stage was Raitora, exactly? The backsprite from the first evolution seems to fit perfectly with Kotora, but is Raitora the middle stage or the final evolution? Both backsprites don’t match Raitora’s Gold/Silver back sprite all that much, though the middle stage is a bit closer. At the same time, the final stage's backsprite has a black patch running down the middle of its head just like the Gold/Silver backsprite, and it’s face--as much as you can see from the back--looks pretty close to Raitora’s. Raitora could be a mix of the two, but that seems unlikely to me: why redesign a completely new Pokemon when you have two other designs to choose from and rework? If I had to guess, Raitora was probably the reused second stage, and the third stage was abandoned earlier, in the same way Gorochu was abandoned but Pikachu and Raichu were kept. However, I don’t have much to back up any of that. While we're on the subject of Raitora, there's one other thing that intrigues me. We have no move data from this line's Red/Green incarnations, as stated. We have backsprites, so we can't see the lightning bolts on their chests. In other words, the only indication we have that Raitora and friends were electric type in Red/Green is the evidence of the Ponyta/Goldeen triad, as stated before, their angular tails that could be lightning bolts, and the versions of Kotora and Raitora in Gold/Silver. In other words, we didn't have a lot. I'm not sure, had we not seen Kotora and Raitora in Gold/Silver, if anyone would have guessed they were Electric type on the other information, and that seems amazing to me. If something so core to Raitora could barely be figured out from the backsprites, then what else are we missing about the other rejected designs? Like Kotora, Raitora is a super cute Pokemon with a great design (even if it does lean towards a simplistic Animal+ design). It’s a shame Raitora was scrapped: Kotora and Raitora would certainly have been as popular as Pikachu and Raichu. Alas. I’m sure there’s a parallel world close to ours in which Kotora is the mascot for the series and Pikachu didn’t make it to the final.
2 Comments
|