Oh hai!, I have a few POWERFUL OPINIONS when it comes to Pokemon Design, so of course, I shall talk about them here. I'll only do three of the bullet points tonight, since upon proofreading what I've been typing up... I kind of made a word storm. And I'd rather not bother anyone with my Huge Wall o' Text (TM).
- What makes a good/bad Pokémon design to you?
What makes a design good/bad, at least in my eyes, is the ability to communicate its idea to another person cleanly, without TOO much interference. You see, a picture is worth a thousand words, so a good design? it's one that punches the viewer in terms of "This is what x is like". Of course, a designer can totally manipulate how a person sees this subject. They may have an appearance that, at first glance, makes them look like a shy wallflower, but the fact that they have red detailings on their outfits can mean that, in the future, they would become a much more headstrong character.
BUT that is getting a bit off track. The point is, communication. As an example, earlier in this thread, someone mocked that the Meowstic duo looked like bad designs. I disagree with this! The Meowstic duo feature front-lopped ears, beady eyes, twin tails, scarves, even their own hair tufts! But the WAY they're styled, along with their colors, is a hint at their personality (And this isn't getting into why their ears are lopped at all!). In terms of their color scheme, white naturally goes with any color, and blue is aesthetically pleasing to the eye. So you have a boy who's blue, with a very gentlemanly, innocent appearance, while the female is quite the angry princess. Together, they're a pair of mysterious looking cats, which could be enough of a hint to think "Hm, maybe these are Psychic? They're too peculiar to just be Normal".
In terms of a bad Pokemon design... That's hard for me to think about off-hand. I don't want to use the overdesigned meme on my opening post, sooo let me talk about a Pokemon I feel quite bad for. Dragonite. MANY fans don't care for it, if they like Dragonair. And I could understand why, you have Dratini, then this beautiful Dragonair, then derpy Dragonite. While with me, I ADORE and love Dragonite for what it is - A gentle giant of a dragon, who can also be seen as mysterious, and is quite mighty to boot. When it comes to evolutions, they should match the natural progression of the chain, at least tangentially. So seeing as Dragonite shares nearly nothing with Dragonair... Sadly, the 'nite isn't cut out for being a good Dragonair evolution. It's a shame to think on this, since I'm such a huge fan of the 'nite, and yet, I understand how disappointed Dragonair fans are.
- Are there any Pokémon designs you like or dislike for specific reasons? Can you point out exactly what the designers did right/wrong?
In terms of liking or disliking, while I may joke with my friends how I hate certain designs, it's often hyperbole. You see, a lot of deisngs I hate, are usually ones I feel very, very high indifference towards. Versus liking, which would be me being tied to a design mostly from how it speaks for the lore it's based on.
For a Generation 1 example, I ADORE Ninetales. Childhood biases aside, it's a fox. A nine-tailed fox. It just oozes smug from its smirk, BOTH its normal and shiny coloration fit the mythos of kyuubi no kitsune, and overall, it's simply a beautiful fox that I'm happy is the parallel to the Chinese-based Arcanine.
While in terms of a design I'm indifferent on, it's Gardevoir. See, I did use to like Gardevoir as a kid, mostly from how Wally has one in RSE, and I didn't realize as a kid, that it was actually rare?? So spending hours looking for one, and catching one, made me think it's something special. Fast forward some years, and... I don't really care for it. I get why fans love it (Besides what you may see on GIS) - It's a ballroom dancer, a knight, a beautiful dude/dudette who can make BLACK HOLES for their trainer. Its design even fits this theme! But even though logically, I should be like "This is good!', I... Still don't like it. It's one of strange cases where I can identify that something is legit good or bad, but somehow, I still don't like it. It could just be me being way too quirky a thinker? Or I'm just overthinking everything (Oh nooo)
- 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?
EVERYTHING on a Pokemon, appearance, dex lore, moveset, is all important. Everything. I personally go appearance, dex lore, moveset, and out-of-game appearances (Anime/manga) as the tier list. And even then? There are plenty of times where I don't see a mythology reference immediately. So I do like enjoying hearing new trivia of Pokemon I overlook, ESPECIALLY ones I dismiss as lame monsters (I am sorry Beartic, I never knew you were LITERALLY a superhero to polar bears).
There's also funny things to see with movesets, such as Weavile having the ability to Surf (Though weasels, in fact, canNOT swim. Such bad science, Pokemon).