>>40438513Pikachu is a good choice for a macot if you think about it
>Has a simple and remembarable color pattern and a bright color pallete>most iconic features are on its face (minus the zigzaggy tail), which is useful for marketing; just imagine two black triangles above the two red circles, on a yellow bacground, these are just simple shapes, but you'll most likely be thinking "pikachu">It's not just a plain cat or a dog, it's a monster, a tiny fantasy creature that still slightly reminds you of an actual animal, a mammal, like a rodent or something, it's a unique creature and this cathces the idea of Pocket Monsters>appeals to the target audience (primarly children, but is loved by teenagers and adults too)>has unique magical abilities (electricity)>is placed really well in a game - not far from the start, is hidden by a low chance of appearing and is really rewarding when you find it and catch it; So for people who has played the game at least a bit it connects them with positive memoriesSo, the flaws of other gen1 shillmons compared to pikachu
Clefairy:
>what really is this thing?>has a face that's hardly seperable from body>it's pink so it's not as popular among boys due to the stereotypesPoliwhirl:
>Nobody cares who Tajiri's favorite pokemon is. Who even is Tajiri?>See pt. 1 and 2 for clefairyCharizard:
>is just a fire-breathing western dragon, which is, while cool, not unique at all>isn't really cuteEevee
>just a "fox" thing with ordinary color palette and pattern>is far in the game and not even in the grassPsyduck
>a bit bland>I believe that bird-like creatures aren't as popular as mammals or reptilesMewtwo
>far in the game and not even found by everyone who has beaten the game>is agressive which is bad for marketing a child-friendly game about connecting with monsters>has a bit of unsettling design with it being an antropomorphic fetus 