Skip to content

Shy Guy Has No Face In Mario Power Tennis

If you were ever wondering what Shy Guy is hiding behind its mask, you’re about to find out. In a scene in Mario Power Tennis, Shy Guy drops its mask in front of Luigi, unintentionally revealing its true appearance to him. A hacker has played around with the camera in this particular scene get an angle that reveals Shy Guy has no face in the Nintendo GameCube game. Check out the results for yourself in the GIF below:

View post on

Source / Via

21 thoughts on “Shy Guy Has No Face In Mario Power Tennis”

  1. Well if we never see this camera angle in the game traditionally, is it possible that for an efficient use of resources, Nintendo never actually drew a face? Just because there isn’t one rendered doesn’t confirm Shy Guy has no face. It’s like saying that just because Luigi’s shoe is hollow doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a foot, it just means it wasn’t drawn because it wasn’t meant to be seen.

    Efficient use of resources is what Nintendo is all about.

    1. That reminds me of the Fat Albert movie with Kenan Thompson. The dude with the hat (sorry, not sure if that’s the right word) said he didn’t have a face because it was never drawn. When he took the hat off in the real world, he did have a face; but when he returned to the TV show without the hat on, his eyes were floating over his mouth because no one had ever drawn his face XD

      1. Right, because Nintendo should automatically accomodate hackers & the obsessive compulsive. GCN was relatively easy to dev for, so hey, why didn’t they put in that extra effort that’ll be revealed & kinda garner interest over a decade later? For a character whose face was never meant to be seen? Because Nintendo was being lazy there, that’s why. & so were the cast in V for Vendetta, because Evey–‘we’ were entitled to see V’s face @ that 1 point in the plot, but nooo: they were too lazy, prolly used some excuse about artistic integrity, Evey respecting V, there was no reason to see it, it conflicted w/ the moral of the story, or some BS. But I’ve digressed (or did I?)…

        Meanwhile, other devs–most of the industry–now rely on x86 architecture, which is easy to dev for (if they’re not overambitious) since it’s an old, familiar standard, despite being ill-suited for gaming; rely on off-the-shelf parts instead of more custom, dedicated gaming hardware, which is now somehow more expensive & hard to work on; use patches as a crutch to rush releases (Hel, Bayo 2 was technically the only real AAA of 2014 due in large part to its polish); multiplat nearly every title instead of making exclusives & catering to specific subcultures because the short-term savings can go into shareholder pockets & into… cranking out cookiecutter sequels to help fund & perpetuate the constant race that is AAA, instead of funding their cult, AA offerings or truly new IP as they did in previous gens, but that’d also require more teams & work in an already bloated & overworked business model; rely on overly-long & pretentious cutscenes as filler instead of crafting even an adequate amount of actual gameplay (less work to code for player variables); mimick reality because abstract aesthetics, the creativity is harder to craft (although the hardcore audiovisuals do feed the hordes of graphics “enthusiasts” on a budget); HD remasters from last gen, HD remasters…FROM LAST GEN! Now that’s efficiency.

        Ah never mind that or, for that matter, the notion of fun: it’s just great business & loads (load times) of fun! Yeah, I know it has less to do about being lazy & more to do w/ being cheap, keeping up w/ the AAA treadmill, & trying to either compete w/ other industries (e.g. mobile “gaming”), &/or trying to merge their other business sectors into one platform. Still, the entire industry has become fairly lazy, abusing the advantages of new tech as they abandon the tried-but-true standards of yore that required actual work.

        While Nintendo might seem lazy now, they were anything but on GCN. Their quality & output was quite exceptional, especially compared to Wii U, even Wii. Either way, here’s hoping for Atari Shock 2.0 ASAP. & if the industry fails to reset, if it fails to once again offer actual consoles (MIA since 6th gen [console definition]) & of course console games, then so be it: unless the NX prominently offers console-gaming, I don’t need anyone to tell me it already crashed…& is lost forever.

    2. Hmm I think you have a point, but actually I just watched a video about whats under shy guys face, and it has a couple of different scenes, all of which shy guys mask strap stays on whilst the mask falls off.

      Also worth note is right at the end of the video it shows a clip in which shy guy makes expressions; when if its just a mask he shouldn’t be able to effect its emotion.

      Hes a shy guy anyway; he probably doesn’t have much of a face even if hes got one xD

  2. I know this is a fun post, but the absolute statement in the headline just gives me the bad taste of Game Theory. We all know that nothing is there because nothing was meant to be shown. Even so, he could just be wearing his hood over his real face.

  3. As others have said, it’s not that Shy Guy has no face but the fact they never bothered to make him an actual face in the game because you weren’t supposed to see it to begin with. Besides, you are supposed to use your imagination. Like in this scene when Peter takes off Death’s hood.

    1. I love when creators do that- leave something untouched, not because they are lazy, but so that something can be left to the viewer’s imagination. It’s something I want to do in my own works too.

      Like, thinking back to FNAF since the recent article here is still on my brain, how we never see the kitchen in the first game, because the dev wanted one room’s appearance to be left up to the player, in his or her mind. Further backed by no .jpg files for the room existing.

      1. We need more high budget movies of HP Lovecraft’s Cthulu Mythos. So many creatures they could easily leave to the human imagination. Ironically, most of the more powerful monsters in that mythos are so beyond what the human imagination can comprehend that just looking at the creature can kill the human that looks upon it, or at least putting that person in a coma or driving them completely insane if they are lucky enough to survive. In fact, Stephen King’s It is heavily influenced by the Cthulu Mythos since Pennywise’s true form is never seen. The spider form it took in the ending of the book is as close as the human imagination can get to understanding it’s true form.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: