Talk:BFG (weapon)

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 January 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Original Doom Programming?

I do not remember where but somewhere I've heard a ru|mor that the traces in original Doom were unitially plasma fireballs, but were made invisible because it caused too much of slowdown on the machines of the day to render so many sprites. –Gnomz⁰⁰⁷(?) 17:25, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BFG 2704 - Fredrik | talk 19:02, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I was being silly. But, should not this be a single article documenting all incarnations of BFG, including Quake 2 and Doom Beta since it's ID's original FPS ultimate weapon, the Quake could be in the form of short paragraph with a reference to main article –Gnomz⁰⁰⁷(?) 20:07, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they should, since the Quake series is in the same universe as Doom (or, a continuation of the series). I'm reconsidering my proposal to merge the articles for BFG9000 and BFG10K, however, because the final product would look messy with two more images, plus the one image for the "BFG 2704", for one article.–Spamchicken

Where was it stated that they take place in the same universe? 24.255.172.149 14:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decimated

Sorry for being a grammar nazi or whatever, but the caption for the Doom II screenshot says it is capable of 'decimating' an entire room. Doesn't decimate mean to one tenth of something? Yeah... --ChristopherEdwards 01:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Literally, perhaps. Originally, almost certainly. In common parlance? I hope not, otherwise I'll look really silly :-). Regardless, if you think a different word would be more accurate or better-suited for the article, be BOLD! and make the changes. No-one'll get upset. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 04:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna put in my .02 here. According to Dictionary .com, the meaning/origin of 'Decimate' is

'deci·mation n. Usage Note: Decimate originally referred to the killing of every tenth person, a punishment used in the Roman army for mutinous legions. Today this meaning is commonly extended to include the killing of any large proportion of a group.'

Don't worry if you want to change it, though, I've been through this conversation before :) DarkMasterBob 06:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The statement is still unclear. It now says "The most powerful weapon in the game, it causes major damage to opponents and can clear entire rooms of foes." The first part is clear enough, but "causes major damage to opponents" is so vague that it adds nothing, and "can clear entire rooms of foes" is even worse. Every weapon in the game, from the brass knuckles to the shotgun, can be used to clear entire rooms of foes. So what is this supposed to mean? If anyone can find a way to clarify this statement, please do so, since the only way I can think of to fix it is to just reduce it to "It is the most powerful weapon in the game."--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have tweaked it. Mezigue (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's better, thanks.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:41, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ammo

It dosen't mention it's ammo, what and how much it uses. Was it 30 Cells? Dfrg.msc 06:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As i recall from Doom 3, the ammo was a dedicated BFG cell (1 shot = 1 BFG cell). Doom and Doom 2 used existing plasma rifle cells i think. UnfriendlyFire 03:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

40 energy cells in Doom and Doom II. 50 in Quake 2. 200.85.209.5 (talk) 22:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate Name

there are alternate names for the BFG9000 like Big Fucking Gun 9000

That's not an alternate name: That's what the abbreviation "BFG" stands for.

Wait, it's not the Big Friendly Giant? — TheJames 12:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To make things even more confusing: In the "Doom" movie there is a scene with the BFG (looking slightly different from that one in the game and has the version number 3.14 instead of 9000) on a computer monitor and the written-out name "bio force gun". Whatever this means, since the BFG does not really appear as a biological weapon.--SiriusB 10:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the alternative names are removed. They are irrelevant and lack sources. Alternatively, that they are moved down, to a section of their own. I think it is important that the article should be quite clear in that BFG stands for Big Fucking Gun and nothing else.85.227.226.168 08:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Svetovid 21:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guys I've just thought of a really cool name that fits for the BFG: BINARY FUSION GUN!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.0.178.216 (talk) 03:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck is a Binary Fusion Gun?

Wikipedia Vienna (talk) 07:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The name is given as "Big Fragging Gun" in the current revision of the article, citing the Doom II manual and the original Doom design document, but I've just read them and the Doom II manual doesn't appear to say, while the Doom design document says "Big Fucking Gun". Tws45 (talk) 00:42, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BFG9000 or BFG 9000?

The article title has stated it being called "BFG9000". However, the article itself has the name "BFG 9000". Which one is correct, and if one is right, then which one is editted? Aramjm 19:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done (corrected to BFG9000)--Svetovid 21:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B.F.M.

Why does B.F.M. ("Big Furry Monster" from Magic: The Gathering) redirect here? They have nothing to do with each other.24.27.203.38 15:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that it does, and you didn't provide an actual link to the redirecting article, so... in any case, you could just edit it to point at the correct place. Ham Pastrami (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bfg9000sprite.gif

Image:Bfg9000sprite.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the asterisks?

As far as I know BFG doesn't stand for "Big F***ing Gun," it stands for "Big Fucking Gun." This isn't a children's book here you know. Wikipedia is clinical. Use your words. Thank you. 75.64.190.54 (talk) 19:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious?

Wikipedia Vienna (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you were a child seeking information about a children's book titled "The BFG" then you would come across a particularly nasty surprise, considering that you're 5 years old. Will someone please think of the children!!?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.114.29 (talk) 01:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What children?

Wikipedia Vienna (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly Placed Info

'The fictional weapon was selected by a real military expert as the fictional video game gun he would bring to war.' This does not belong in the introduction. It is an aside at best and trivia at worst. ||MJ

Novels

Did this gun appear in the Doom novels? If so, said novels should be mentioned, espeically concsidering how they are so very different from the video games. Lots42 (talk) 17:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed?

I have a question: On the first sentence within the section "Critical Reception", it says "UGO.com ranked the BFG 9000 at number two on their Top 50 Video Game Weapons of All Time list[citation needed].", yet below, there is a "citation", [1], which leads to the UGO site. Should I edit the page to add the citation there or can I not?

--72.173.192.59 (talk) 22:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Doom character"

Being one of the four notable video game weapons might not necessitate another template, but this still seems a bit absurd. 8ty3hree (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of Mention: Doom 64

The version for the Nintendo 64 console entitled Doom 64 featured the BFG 9000. Why is this not mentioned in the main article? Aidensdaddy2k9 (talk) 06:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added it. 208.83.126.113 (talk) 20:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on BFG (weapon). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205182645/http://machinima.com/film/view%26id%3D28263 to http://www.machinima.com/film/view%26id%3D28263

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:34, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An issue about the BFG9000's "tracers"

The main issue is that the BFG 9000’s damage output per tracer is incorrectly stated in this article as “between 16 and 128 damage” which I have corrected it. If you believe otherwise, here's how the BFG 9000 works, as explained by YouTuber decino.

Found this user who made this erroneous edit: Anon423, at 14:24 (UTC), 7 January 2022. How the user got this completely wrong (For each tracer dealing between 16 and 128 damage is not just a misunderstatement, but misleading too), I don't know what source that say that each BFG tracer deals "between 16 and 128 damage".

Wikipedia Vienna (talk) 15:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This needs work

This article is kind of sloppy; I feel like it might need to be tagged for a rewrite. 2605:B40:1303:900:D95:621D:F8C:29AC (talk) 16:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging something does not mean anything is going to happen. There is not a magical team of editors that will swoop in and fix articles because of a tag.

Consider adding more context to your talk page edits. What parts are sloppy, what would you do to make them better. What sources are poor, and why.

And this is also after all the free encyclopedia, that anyone can edit. Maybe try and make some improvements to articles on your own. Beach drifter (talk) 17:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware of this; when you tag an article, you're letting it be known that it needs work, which could eventually come to be. It won't happen immediately. Anyway, the "Appearances and homages outside Doom and Quake" section (especially "The BFG Archetype") is pretty clunky and could use some extra sources. 2605:B40:1303:900:D95:621D:F8C:29AC (talk) 17:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"BFGv3.14" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect BFGv3.14 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13 § BFGv3.14 until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 13:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]