Metal Gear Wiki

Talk:Metal Gear REX

1,731pages on
this wiki

Back to page

What the hell happened to this article?Edit

Look at it. What the hell happened to all the categories? Someone restore the page to when it had all its old info please. -Shockwolf10 03:57, August 7, 2010 (UTC)

Where do the stats come from?Edit

They seem rather dubious, particularly the roadspeed, and a lot of the information isn't accurate to the game; for example, the armament doesn't mention the TMD missile module at all, and claims the anti-tank missiles in the upper legs are anti-infantry, even though Otacon specifically says they're not antipersonnel warheads in the Codec conversation about them. Is it that silly MGS Database again? Evil Tim 06:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm unsure, it was added in March by an unregistered User. I'll dig around and see if I can find anything later today. --Fantomas 10:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

REX data Edit

I don't think the that Rex has a consumption of only 3,687L/km (5550L / 1505 km). That's impossible related to its 227452,5hp ( 450hp * 505,450 tons).

  • It would be interesting to know where these specs actually came from. Anybody know? --Bluerock 11:14, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Hideo Kojima? -- FPS Headhunter Mphhh hmmhhhh hmmhhh hmmmhhh............ 17:08, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

  • Source? --Bluerock 17:12, January 31, 2010 (UTC)
    • They're from the strategy guide for MGS so they're not canon. The machine gun calibre is incorrect and it states the missiles are anti-troop when they're supposed to be anti-tank among other discrepancies--Bluerock 13:45, March 13, 2010 (UTC)
Uh, do you have any official word on the canonicity of the details? Fact is, these numbers come from a strategy guide authorized by Konami and with the foreword written by Hideo Kojima himself, so to arbitrarily decide that they're non-canon because they have minor discrepancies with the game is... well, arbitrary. Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 09:23, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
Most of the details are inaccurate and contradicted by the game itself so there's not much point including them. They are not mentioned anywhere else, nor in the MGS4 Database. Also, Kojima didn't write the foreword specifically for the book, it just detailed his thoughts behind the game itself, not the strategy guide. The guide expands on other details too, which are considered to be non-canon, such as the backstories of Big Boss, Decoy Octopus and Liquid Snake. --Bluerock 09:30, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
Many details in the MGS Database are inaccurate and contradicted by the games, too. Does that mean that the Database is non-canon too? - Marcaurelix
In my personal opinion, yes, the MGS4 Database also isn't canon. Anything that makes quite a few errors does not deserve to be counted as canon. which is also why I often make it an effort to include anything the Database states in the Behind the Scenes section (and by that, I mean that it is exclusive to the database.). Weedle McHairybug 21:10, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
Then why do you consider the novels canon, when they also sometimes contradict the games or change conversations? - Marcaurelix
I don't take everything in the novels as being completely canon, but some things were canon. For instance, it expanded on several events that we didn't know, such as the LET project, as well as Miller's death. For one thing, Gray Fox's death isn't canon in the novel, even though it was pretty well done for a change. In fact, that was really the only true contradiction in the Novelization to the games. Weedle McHairybug 21:18, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
First off, who are we to decide what is canon and what isn't? How do we know that something should be canon or not? Did Kojima himself tell you that the database isn't canon? What is your criteria? That it expands on certain events. Then with that criteria, I think that the comics should be canon. You claim that the novels expend on several events, but so does the database, the official mission guide, and the comics. I think that we should decide what is canon and what isn't. Should the information that appears in the novels, comics, database and mission guide be canon as long as it doesn't contradict the games? - Marcaurelix
Fine, I concede defeat and will remove myself from the arguement. Besides, I shouldn't have gone into the arguement to begin with, as you were asking Bluerock that question. Weedle McHairybug 21:28, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
I respect your opinion and I didn't want you to concede defeat. This isn't a war. I'm just looking for answers. I was just questioning the wikia's criteria for deciding what is canon and what isn't. - Marcaurelix
In general, we usually consider things to be canon if they don't contradict the games, which should always be taken as the primary canon source. In the case of REX's data, most of the stats are blantantly inaccurate when compared to the presentation and details given in the game, as are the backstories of a lot of the characters as given in the strategy guide. The same is true for the MGS4 database, we don't include information that contradicts what is told by the games, the database even contradicts itself on many occasions. --Bluerock 06:03, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
So, as long as the information that appears in the database, the official mission guide, the comics and the novels doesn't contradict the games, it's considered canon? - Marcaurelix
In essence, yes, but we do need to use common sense sometimes for things that are not so obvious and we discuss these issues as they crop up. It's not a perfect system, but it's the best we can do considering that we will never be told otherwise by Konami or Kojima. --Bluerock 08:07, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
This wiki definitely needs a proper canon policy. I believe it can be done easily by including all the available information in the articles and have the contradictions listed in a "Discrepancies" section. There's a lot of stuff in the REX article that could benefit from such an approach - the tech specs might not fully match those in the game, but most of them are interesting fluff that should get more view time than a note at the bottom. Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 20:56, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
But the article already mentions all of REX's stats. To include these in the article proper would just be unnecessary and redundant. Also, as someone pointed out at the start of the topic, the fuel consumption and engine power are not feasible, so I don't think they really deserve a bigger mention. I do agree that a policy on canon would be quite useful though. --Bluerock 21:03, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

GAU-8? Edit

Is there any reference for REX specifically having GAU-8 machine guns? Some users have previously added this in the article. --Bluerock 20:56, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

Also, on a similar note, users have also previously stated it had AGM-114P 'Hellfire' AT missiles, but yet again, no source was mentioned. --Bluerock 21:32, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Otacon said it was equipped with "a Vulcan cannon, a laser and a Railgun." That would mean it's specifically an M61, unless he's using vulcan as a generic for rotary cannons. If MGS4 tells you what the guns are when you're controlling Rex, that would decide it (haven't played it in a while, so don't really remember). Evil Tim 02:41, November 9, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, they are Vulcan cannons, but I was just wondering why people kept mentioning GAU-8 previously. MGS4 doesn't specify the make, only that they're 30mm machine cannons. If I remember right, didn't REX only have the one gun in MGS1, but they gave it twin guns in MGS4? --Bluerock 08:58, November 9, 2010 (UTC)
Naw, it was always two guns, on the undersides of the "wings" either side of the cockpit; the MG attack would fire twin lines of tracers in a straight line, with the gap between them narrowing as the difficulty was raised. Does seem like they upped the calibre from 20mm to 30mm between 1 and 4, mind, and I don't really thing the weapons are large enough for 30mm (an A-10's gun barrels are each seven and a half feet long). Might be worth noting that they're said to be Vulcans in 1 (Vulcan is the specific name of the M61) but 30mm in 4; this might just be an error in 1, though, since the game's plot summary also describes the Hind's chin gun as a Vulcan. Evil Tim 05:01, November 10, 2010 (UTC)

Railgun Edit

Was it specifically stated anywhere that the railgun was not included with the plans for REX when it was sold on the black market? --Bluerock 20:22, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

I might be mistaken, as I only had evidence from a little debate I had with a user on GameFAQs about the Patriots vs. Outer Heaven, but I think it was implied in Nastasha Romanenko's novel. Something about the Railgun having bugs or something. Weedle McHairybug 20:24, March 24, 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it only says they had problems with the railgun initially, which is the reason that they conducted the test exercise on Shadow Moses. The test was succesful and the data was stored on the optical disk given to Snake by Baker, and later stolen by Ocelot. --Bluerock 20:43, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Ridiculous calibres of weapons on REX Edit

[Armament] Machine-guns: 2xg12.7mm in the nose (covering 60° arc to the front)

Is there such specification? g is a unit of acceleration [m/s/s] not length to my recollection

Ammunition: 10,000x12.7mm

Ridiculous, 10 metres? A missile or whatever god forbid a projectile with those dimensions? Longer than Solid Snake himself.

Corrections and opinions welcome, scientists and engineers especially welcome. Remember, S.I. units. Imperial units have cost lives.

Uncle269 11:38, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

The canon specs for REX from MGS1 & 4 are listed in the infobox. These "alternate" specs were given in an "official" strategy guide, with a few liberties taken by the author, apparently. Where did you get the 10m from? The ammo spec gives capacity and calibre (mm). Also, I have no idea what the 'g' is, but I don't believe it to be a unit of measurement from where it's positioned. --Bluerock 13:21, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
He's misreading 10,000 x 12.7mm rounds for the ammo being 10,000mm x 12.7mm rounds. Which is silly. I don't know where the g comes from, whether it's a typo or something in the original source, but it's not like having a leader / follower letter necessarily indicates a unit; for example, the SVD's round is 7.62x54mmR, but R stands for rimmed, not radius. Evil Tim 10:16, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki