I think that it could have a few more defining features though, perhaps its exterior could be a bit more pocket filled, and the lips of the craters could extend a bit further out, if only to give it a more defined shape.
I agree, and the final design will have more defined texture/features on it, but much more and it looks too busy and poofy, like cheese, or those puffin thingies from Metroid Prime. (I actually sketched the poke with more craters and stuff, and that's what it looked like.)
With bumps and textures, my reference design was Weezing:
That's the level of crater/texture type of stuff you can expect to see.
I think that an aura trail of ice/rocks could be used behind it, once again, if only to give it a more defined shape.
I agree with this too, at least with an aura/energy trail. I actually did use floating rock particles in one sketch (DBZ-style), and it works well... but mostly when it is levitating in place. Combining the tail and particles can look awkward, but when the tail is absent, the particles fill in that extra ethereal void missing from its design. I think there will always be either an aura, aura tail, or levitating particles included in his design, just not all necessarily at the same time.
But I want to avoid ice particles, in case people want to claim this is Ice/Rock...
As far as the design choices, I prefer the Starmie-esque eye, and the bowl shape (think it was choice "b"). I just think they look better.
Also, go with the aura swirls around they eye, they define the Pokemon better.
Sounds good. :)
---------
From the other comments, it sounds like I'm going to have to keep that aura tail permanent. Or, add some other sort of tail. (After reading more comments: Or, maybe not...)
As for features and definition, there's still those little rock projections (I was thinking of a satellite when adding them). I could add another set of four to the front face (around the eye). If you want more definition, then give me some feedback on the engine-thing design on the back.
I am going to shoot for simplicity and an elegant design, though, no compromise on that. It's an intentional design decision.
---------
Oh, more comments! I should refresh more!
I'm reading everything and taking all comments under consideration, you can be sure of that.
X_Presumptuous, while I couldn't care less about realism (no, really, the best ideas are always abstract in origin), I know a lot of other people do. If it were up to me, I wouldn't have a thruster per se, but just a design for its back. I just don't want to get points taken off from voters because they "just don't get how it can fly through space" (and yet, capturing and training monsters in miniscule capsules is perfectly logical...).
ANinyMouse, you can post whatever you like, I don't mind. I want to see what you're talking about.
Also, you can back me up now whenever I say that adding a tail will make it look awkward. :P
(Like I said, I already tested a bunch of designs on scratch paper, and the design really does work best with a small but effective number of key features.)
-------
I'm going to try adding little rock satellites tomorrow, but I fear it will make the comet look like it is visually "dragging", if you know what I mean. I may also bring back the circles on the side and make the four rock protrusions (which are there in the Lucario, Pikachu, and Voltorb/Golem sketches, they're probably just too hard to see in pencil/sketch form, and will be noticeably more identifiable in an inked version) and a constant aura more visually prominent. But really, anything more...
If you don't believe me, try sketching it yourself. ;)