Talk:Self-regenerating molecular armor

I don't think it's English translation of a Cybertronian term so much as it's a description of fact -Derik 22:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the phrase was spoken by the Army dudes, before they ever talked to any Transformer. It's not a translation of anything. --ItsWalky 22:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Protoform generated repairs?

It's established in the Movie Guide that the Transformer's exostructure/skeleton is generated by the core protoform out of its own ultra-dense mass and any nearby matter it can capture. That could probably be included here. My question is, IS it fair to assume the self-regeneration described in this article is also a function of the inner protoform? After all, the protoform can generate a new exostructure in a matter of moments or alter its existing one entirely (Bumblebee switching alt-modes) in seconds so wouldn't repair likely function in the same way, and just as simply?--ZacWilliam 23:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that the Furman book? I'd really like to hold off on hurrying to clutter up Transformer anatomy material from Dreamworks itself with him. If the book doesn't explicitly say "... and that's how they can regenerate their armor.", I vote not to include it. -Rotty 23:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The guide stuff is as official as anything in the film, so that's a definate. We of course won't add any material to the wiki that's made up, I was more along the lines of seeing if others thought that was a logical way for things to work given what we know about the protoform's funtionings.--ZacWilliam 23:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I have the book being held for me at my local BNN, I'll let you know what I think when I get home. -Derik 00:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

QUICK, BAN HIM. -Rotty 00:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This same guide also has totally nonsensical power-plans-esque parts idenitifications on the pictures of all the characters, so at least some aspects of it should not be taken seriously. Unless you really think all of Prime's little truck-mode lights are missile launchers...  :) --Steve-o 01:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I honestly don't think that's any more far fetched than anything else in Transformers. :) So his lights can launch missles. Why the heck not? Seriously though, we don't get to choose what's to be taken seriously. Official canon is official canon and there's plenty of things in TFs MUCH sillier and less likely than anything you'll find in that guide.--ZacWilliam 02:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not more far-fetched, no... but it is completely... out of character, sort of, for the movie universe? I'm not saying that it's not canon. I'm saying that we have to be discerning about what supplemental material we assume is valid in other, related continuities. I am very confident in saying that in the movie, Prime does not actually have 10 or whatever missile launchers and 10 more morter launchers in truck mode. In some other Movie-family continuity, whatever the book is depicting, he obviously does because it says so. But that guide, like ALL supplemental/prequel material, does not necessarily apply to the continuity of the actual film itself. Sometimes we see direct contradictions, and sometimes it's just stuff like those plans which are really, really out of place. So, as Rotty says, I think we should be careful about declaring stuff to be true in the strict movie-verse based on supplemental stuff written by totally disconnected people. The part you were asking about sounds okay to me, personally. The explanation is in line with what we saw in the film, doesn't seem out of place, etc.. But that's not going to be true for everything. I don't want to see Prime's fiction section for the film modified to say that his truck mode has all those launchers on it, for example. --Steve-o 03:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

So you're saying it's like the bizarre one-off never-mentioned-anywhere-else powers Autobots would display in a single episode of the Sunbow cartoon and never use again- even in circumstances where those powers would immediately solve an otherwise implacable problem.

Yes those powers are real, yes they are canon- but to document them as if they were an ability that Transformer always has at their disposal would distort the understanding of the character being communicated by a reader of the article. -Derik 03:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I want to note that Ghosts of Yesterday describes Transformers as having multiple weapons systems, some described as "main". The implication is certainly that Transformer bodies - Optimus included - are covered with a number of (apparently physically small) guns. It all really seems to be written as if how one would describe space ship weapons.

However, despite noting this, I agree with Steve. --Sntint 04:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but that seems like an awefully slippery slope to me. Basically you'd be deciding that it must be describing a minor "offshoot" continuity based soley on "that just doesn't "seem" like movie Prime to me." I just don't think the wiki should decide something like that based on nebulous personal feelings as opposed to actual facts. That way lies anarchy and uselessness if taken very far. If a piece of tangental media directly contridicts the film (say, states that Prime possesses no melle weapons or Frenzy is quiet and subdued) then yes, that fact is definately from a seperate continuity amd shuould be stated as such, but barring actual contridiction like that, I think we should grant that a fact from the official Guide to the Movie is true of the Movie. I do undersatand what you mean, it's just letting personal taste/feelings decide what's canon for what seems awefully iffy to me. --ZacWilliam 08:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hrm, while I happen to agree with Steve-o that sometimes you do need to make a rational judgment of what is important (not necessarily to not documenting, but what would go in a core abilities writeup vs. being considered trivia.)

That said- I've read the book since replying the first time- and I have to disagree with Steve-o. They're micro-missile launchers, essentially nuisance weapons. And it's not like we ever saw Optimus Prime in a combat situation in vehicle mode- he transformed as soon as he ran into Bonecrusher- he never even had a chance to use/not use them. I have absolutely no problem believing that Optimus Prime has the 39 missile launchers described in the guide. You know the dippy, weird-sounding energy-pulse release ability the book describes Bumblebee as having? It sounds like they're pulling it out of their ass, but he uses that ability in the Transformers game (I think you only see it on Barricade's missions when he's on the defensive.) It's exactly as described, down the the period of vulnerability after using it. (Annoying as hell too!) -Derik 08:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm totally fine with prioratizing. I wouldn't even put everything we saw in the movie in the main bio writeup. Some of the stuff from the guide is maybe important enough for a quick nod but it's mostly minor stuff and is gonna go below somewhere and yeah, some of it can go in a section titled Transformers Movie Guide down in the fiction section, which is probably all anyone was ever implying we do, and I'm fine with that. As long as we don't exclude any offical info from the wiki based on personal preference, which I got a little vibe of from Rotty's original post above, but don't think anyone really would, I'm cool.

And on the second note I actually think that's really cool about BBs weapon getting used in two places. Synergy rocks cohesive universes. We know from Botcon that the Game makers got all their info on the TF weapons, what they were, what they looked like, how they worked, ect directly from Bay/ILM. This seems to strongly imply that the info either from those guys or from the game guys (depending where that weapon originated) also was given as production material to Simon as he wrote the guide. It's a point in favor of everything's interconnectedness at least. :)--ZacWilliam 10:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)