Follow TV Tropes
TRS discussion on misuse of BFG. Short version, kill any examples you find that are not a carried weapon that is enormous for its wielder.
If so, then which trope would a giant cannon like the Great Turkish Bombard fall under?
This article would be a lot more useful if it stated what "BFG" stands for, preferably right at the beginning. It has a list of things BFG does NOT stand for, but not what it does.
No it wouldn't, and Eddie has stated to not expand the acronym. It's completely obvious what it means.
To be honest, when I first joined the wiki I'd see BFG potholed from other articles and have no idea what it meant. I only understood when I finally followed the link to the main article.
I was going to ask if a censored version would be acceptable, but then I realized that technically that would probably violate several rules. How about "a.k.a. Ludicrously Huge Firearm" as an acceptable alternate trope name? Gets the point across without using (or alluding to) profanity.
Another issue is that the trope is frequently used. We usually leave trope names alone if they are much usage. It's even got a mention on Wikipedia.
Where in Administrivia is the policies for profanity?
What happened to the folders? I remember there being more than there is now.
The real life folder was deleted entirely...for...some reason...
like the Dakka Page. Someone removed the RL folder and typed "No real life examples please." Without explanation on whats wrong.
Do not add Real Life.
This is about a trope used in storytelling, not
an inventory of the world's weapons.
Then why is BFS allowed to have real life example but not BFG(there are large hand-held gun)?
Added Real Life example before I read this. I think this one's justified in that it's not just any big gun; it may be the biggest man-wieldable firearm ever seriously proposed as a workable weapon. It looks like something out of anime.
Why remove "Big. Fucking. Gun."? Because of the profanity? Shouldn't there be something in the description of the page that says what "BFG" actually stands for?
I'm wondering if there's any "in proportion to operator" restriction in this trope. Obviously, if you pilot a Humungous Mecha, it's going to have a big gun. In Evangelion, the spent shell casings from some of the guns are big enough to crush cars, but in proportion to the Evas, they're not that different from standard-issue submachine guns.
That's been decided to be the key distinction, actually. "Ridiculously huge for the wielder" versus "ridiculously huge".
I´d like to have the simple editing reason "no" by evilist_tim a little further explained please.
It seems a rather rude comment on what might be a completely understandable reason.
I went out of my explaining how the one-man use of MG-42s is not simply a handwave, but an actual technique they might have learned in universe by the very same people whom they got the things from...
They don´t grab any "added foregrips" in Jin Roh, they grab the bipod, which is part of the technique...
There is even a video, showing it CAN actually be done. Now add a bit Rule Of Cool and Power Armor and it seems completely reasonable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B57dW3A-DT0
Or maybe there was another reason. I wouldn´t know, since I was only supplied with a simple "no".
Sorry, deleted because doubleposts suck.
Please add: land-shark gun (i think from beyond good and evil 2)
whatever the plasma launcher from halo:reach is called. (it shoots 4 projectiles per trigger pull. the projectiles are homing grenades that stick to people).
gears of war 3 (not out yet). the C.O.G. 1-shot, and the digger launcher
How about NOOOO......
ya crazy Dutch bastard!
The first paragraph has "Get some" as what the BFG user says, but I've always heard it as "Come get some" (a la Ash in Army of Darkness, Hudson in Aliens, and others). Okay to revise?
It's "GET SOME" in Full Metal Jacket.
You lose! Good day sir!
Well, I changed the picture again...I didn't realize that this had been such a contentious issue, so I'm going to explain why.
In my opinion, the picture for BFG should be, well, an absurdly large gun. The picture I put up is, well, this gun is roughly the size of four people, and the picture has been edited in such a way that it makes up the focus of the entire frame. Contrast the Men in Black picture where, big as the guns are, don't really draw much attention in the shot. The agents take up more space than they do.
I've no interest in starting an Edit War over this- I just casually saw the picture and thought "that gun is so ridiculously large I can't believe someone was actually paid to draw it". As is such, if people prefer the Men in Black picture, by all means, put it back. But I'd like to ask that we not keep the Men in Black picture solely because of a crowner vote that took place several weeks ago. If you replace it, replace it because you genuinely believe the Men in Black picture does a better job conveying the trope. And if at all possible, please provide an explanation for that here because I can't think of any reason how it does.
It fits the intention of the trope better, the Man In Black one, as it's the gun causing the character to look more badass. Something absurdly extreme like that.. thing you switched it to is more a parody of the BFG than a straight example. The image should be a straighter example than that quad-gatling-whatsit monstrosity. You need to see the agents as well in order to get a feel for how the size of the gun relates to the person carrying it.
Plus there was the discussion thread and crowner, I don't see how you can just discount that as irrelevant.
I think a more extreme version of this trope as the page picture works better, personally, since BFGs in general tend to be Rule of Cool Up to Eleven. And you can get a size comparison- you can see just enough of the guy holding the gun to make that determination.
Note that I didn't even realize there was a discussion thread and crowner until you reverted the change. Not everyone goes to the forums, you know. "I think this picture is better than the one we have right now" is pretty standard operating procedure most of the time barring an Edit War, and as I mentioned, I'm not interested in engaging in one of those.
I'd rather get some more input from other people who were involved in the original discussion before I switch it back, but my opinion is that the MIB picture is more suitable.
We have been over and over this. The MIB picture is the pick. The latest attempt was not an improvement. Couldn't even tell if it was man-carried.
I doubt a gun only Superman could even pick up is a good pick. Also, the gun itself looks totally stupid.
Looks like this discussion has moved elsewhere or simply ended. Just have to add my $0.02: the current pic (http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/bfg_for_real.jpg) is awesome and seems to capture the idea of a BFG perfectly. Short of finding a good Doom screen cap showing the big ball of energy blowing away big baddies, I say keep "bfg_for_real.jpg".
Putting this here until I can find something else to do with it.
Is that all the Real Life section?
It's part of it that Fast Eddie deleted, along with an earlier part he missed. Took me quite a while to research and write, so I'll have to find a new home for it at some point.
Could probably use a reference to the Barrett M82/M107, especially since they seem to be the go-to weapon whenever someone wants to give their Cold Sniper a BFG.
Regarding the real-life example section; I think it could stand a rewrite. At the moment it's about guns that are big, when really it ought to be more guns that are good because they are big (such as Carlos Hathcock sniping with an M2), or cases where it was assumed big guns = better, such as the Nazi railway guns, the Royal Navy's more than slightly ridiculous M-Class submarines, HMS Dreadnought and so on. It'd avoid having the illogical setup we currently have where perfectly good examples are removed for no real reason.
I agree, but if I were to fix this problem that's probably exactly what I'd do (accidentally remove perfectly good examples for no real reason). Someone who knows more about the nuances of this trope and Real Life examples would be better suited for this task than me.
I'm writing about you.
Right, there you go.
Okay, who changed the picture and why?
Evilest_Tim originally and someone unnamed changed it back once again. I personally think the clone wars picture is better but that's what the discussion page is for.
I changed it because the new image represents a better depiction; the weapon is larger and is the focus of the image rather than being something held by a guy in armour as in the other pic. It's been the page image for about a month. The only person who's objected is DragonQuestZ based on his made-up rule that if you put a gun on a tripod or mounting it isn't a BFG anymore, even though in terms of the trope as a literary device it can still have exactly the same function (eg Gruber's Dragon used a massive recoilless cannon in Die Hard; he could have been using a shoulder-fired rocket launcher and the scene wouldn't have changed at all) and therefore be the same trope. Even when you get to light artillery, they have you control a FlaK 37 solo (when the normal crew is ten) in Call Of Duty for the same reason they give you a Panzerfaust; because they want to have a spectacular moment and so you need a spectacular weapon.
I actually have some interest in asking just how far this trope should go; clearly the line that allows a weapon to start and stop being a BFG depending on whether or not you're holding it is arbitrary, but is there really any difference between, say, the gun used by Gruber's henchman and, say, Frankie Lideo's giant mountain-laser in Moonwalker or Hein's Zeus Cannon in the Final Fantasy movie, or even the scene where the Emperor is using the Death Star to make Luke angry? Do we actually have a trope for "even bigger fucking gun?"
In all four cases the logic is the same; the villain is shown to be a huge threat because he has huge firepower; only the magnitude of the firepower differs. While the latter two could be seen as non-examples because more than one person is operating the weapon, I'd think BFG could still go up to Lideo's gun since he's controlling it directly from a chair with hand cranks (and thus you might also count the scene in Spirits Within where Hein is firing Zeus manually).
I'd say that like Cool Guns this trope is more about how a weapon is shown than its actual scale; if the size is a visual shorthand for power and usefulness and the weapon the focus of the scene, it's a BFG, if not it's just a big gun as with most background depictions of artillery and crew-served weapons. This makes it more clearly a subtrope of Bigger Is Better, and means the greater focus on the weapon (it almost seems to be shunting the gunner out of the picture, which is perfect) makes the NSV / Kord image a better page pic than the clonetroopers.
Discussion on image picking
Seems to be an incorrect link as I'm only getting a line of text saying it doesn't exist.
Made a Crowner to end the edit war.
My problem with the Clone Trooper picture isn't so much the image but the caption. The caption doesn't really make any sense or have anything to do with BFG as a trope. If we could come up with a better caption I think that image can work. At least, the gatling laser thing fits as a BFG, though I'm not sure about that quad whatsit harness thing. Though, personally, I'd suggest digging up a good picture of Hellboy's "Big Baby" from that movie, as I think that fits ab it better. I'm just having trouble finding a good image that shows off the scale properly.
I was going to link the caption "Well, at least it's not a concealed weapon." to ArsonMurderAndJaywalking, but seeing as it's under discussion, I'll just put that suggestion on the table. [EDIT] I'll just link it, as in hindsight, the caption seems to be independent of the specific image itself.
Community Showcase More