650 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexXIV]

Phaedon wrote...

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

None of it will matter.

ME3 will be completable by itself and without any ME1 or ME2 carryovers. Those who kept the base might see some new weapons on a ship in the cutscenes; those who saved the rachni will see rachni ships in the final assault; those who saved both will see both, and none of it will matter outside of cosmetics.

Because those people who destroyed the base, killed the rachni, blew up the geth, sent the quarians into total disarray, killed the Council, and otherwise killed every other ally they might have found in the previous games will still be able to win the day.
And that includes those who never played ME1 or ME2, as the default Shepard is a bit of an idiot that way.

Why do you present this like a bad thing ? It would be bad if you had no chance to beat the game if you picked all the renegade choices in the first game for example.

There should be consequences though. Like 'Karma'. Not saying you shouldn't be able to complete the game, but if you act like an ass for the most time you shouldn't be able to save as much people as if you play the more thoughtful type.

[Killjoy Cutter]

I wonder if keeping the Collector base is what allows the Reapers to find Earth, after the Cerberus research team is indoctrinated...

[Vaenier]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I wonder if keeping the Collector base is what allows the Reapers to find Earth, after the Cerberus research team is indoctrinated...

Nope, it was the internet.

[Killjoy Cutter]

True, the internet is always to blame.

[Orion55]

I blame wikileaks.

[Lleuen]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

I wasn't presenting it in a bad way (not purposely, anyway).
I was just being objective in the face of all the claims in this thread.  Saying something like "I hope you guys kept the base..." is like saying "I hope you guys flirted with Kelly..."
None of it will actually matter to ME3's plot or the reaper fight.

 
Precisely, QFT.

[Vaenier]

Orion55 wrote...

I blame wikileaks.

Why? They would be the ones who are telling the truth about the Reapers to the Galaxy.

[Orion55]

Vaenier wrote...

Orion55 wrote...

I blame wikileaks.

Why? They would be the ones who are telling the truth about the Reapers to the Galaxy.

Ha! I did't think of it that way.

[tywinsregards]

I support nuking the **** out of earth from space!

[FoxShadowblade]

lgeass88 wrote...

I support nuking the **** out of earth from space!

Because, you know. They've never used that in the sci-fi genre before....
...right?

[tywinsregards]

FoxShadowblade wrote...

lgeass88 wrote...

I support nuking the **** out of earth from space!

Because, you know. They've never used that in the sci-fi genre before....
...right?

its either that or use the mass accelerator cannon and create a great rift on earth.......wait are those gona be our options??? paragon= fight with all the races and have a lot of casualties or renegade=use a bfg and create a grand canyon from europe to america??

Modifié par lgeass88, 14 décembre 2010 - 08:58 .

[Schneidend]

Why would the Renegade option be to fire a giant mass accelerator weapon at Earth???

[tywinsregards]

Schneidend wrote...

Why would the Renegade option be to fire a giant mass accelerator weapon at Earth???

have you seen how large the rift is? if u fired that at earth, it could easily take out all of Europe with one shot and thats not including the shockwave from the blast that would probably be like throwing a comet at earth at FTL speeds. Oh and that was a "glancing blow" by the way.

Modifié par lgeass88, 14 décembre 2010 - 09:13 .

[Astarothkun]

I vote for giving Grunt 2 Cains and send him flying into the Reaper Army on the back of a third nuke that was roundhousekicked by Chuck Norris while Grunt hummes the Theme from TopGun.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Vaenier wrote...

Orion55 wrote...

I blame wikileaks.

Why? They would be the ones who are telling the truth about the Reapers to the Galaxy.

If you want to call that the truth...

[Schneidend]

lgeass88 wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

Why would the Renegade option be to fire a giant mass accelerator weapon at Earth???

have you seen how large the rift is? if u fired that at earth, it could easily take out all of Europe with one shot and thats not including the shockwave from the blast that would probably be like throwing a comet at earth at FTL speeds. Oh and that was a "glancing blow" by the way.

Yes, yes, mass accelerator weapons can be really powerful. I get that.

WHY would you ever want to do that?

[tywinsregards]

Schneidend wrote...

lgeass88 wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

Why would the Renegade option be to fire a giant mass accelerator weapon at Earth???

have you seen how large the rift is? if u fired that at earth, it could easily take out all of Europe with one shot and thats not including the shockwave from the blast that would probably be like throwing a comet at earth at FTL speeds. Oh and that was a "glancing blow" by the way.

Yes, yes, mass accelerator weapons can be really powerful. I get that.

WHY would you ever want to do that?

you asked why it would be a renegade option and i answered it.if u cant see how bad that could turn out im sorry and i didnt say we didnt have a reason to fire it. As renegade/pro cerberus as i am, im not finna fire that thing on earth unless i have no other choice and considering ive amassed a pretty good fleet ( geth,krogan,council races?, etc) , i shouldnt have to.

[Schneidend]

I'm questioning WHY you would ever fire a super powerful rail gun at your home planet.

[lovgreno]

I suppose you could sum up the base dilemma with a quote from our ripped friend Jacob: "Heavy risk, but the priiize..."

[tywinsregards]

Schneidend wrote...

I'm questioning WHY you would ever fire a super powerful rail gun at your home planet.

And im saying it MIGHT be an option that would be justified if u screwed up in ME1 and ME2. Only way to get rid of all the reapers on earth= fire the cannon on earth and pray it doesnt destroy it. Cant lie it would be interesting to see how bioware lets that play out IF that happens.

[DetailedSubset]

Bitterfoam wrote...


Nor does she need Wrex.

Everybody needs Wrex.
He will wrestle a Reaper to the ground and tear out it's mass effect core with his bear hands, meanwhile your flying a dreadnought augmented with Reaper guns (given to you by Wrex from another Reaper he wrestled) and still get crushed before you get even one hit in.

[lovgreno]

lgeass88 wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

I'm questioning WHY you would ever fire a super powerful rail gun at your home planet.

And im saying it MIGHT be an option that would be justified if u screwed up in ME1 and ME2. Only way to get rid of all the reapers on earth= fire the cannon on earth and pray it doesnt destroy it. Cant lie it would be interesting to see how bioware lets that play out IF that happens.

If most humans are dead or shipped off to some place like the Collector Base and there is no way of saving the rest, yeah it might be best to sacrifice Earth as sparing it would only feed the reapers at that point.

[FoxShadowblade]

Yes, because torching the world fixes the reaper problem. My point being: If humans on Earth are mostly dead/taken by the reapers, why would you waste resources killing what's left? Pull back and regroup. And the MA Gun that dented Klendagon, was massive, bigger than a Dreadnought's. That's cool, except the civilization that built it, killed only that one reaper(I assume, because others could have fallen into the star). "Perhaps it was their one last act of defiance before being wiped out." And I'm pretty sure, they weren't aiming for the planet, it probably went through the reaper entirely, kept going. Stuff does that in space.

If you "screwed up" in ME1, that basically entitles you didn't convince Saren to shoot himself.
If you "screwed up" in ME2..YOU DIED.

There is no second option, you are dead, the galaxy is dead....
Would you like to start a new game?

Modifié par FoxShadowblade, 15 décembre 2010 - 12:36 .

[lovgreno]

FoxShadowblade wrote...

Yes, because torching the world fixes the reaper problem. My point being: If humans on Earth are mostly dead/taken by the reapers, why would you waste resources killing what's left?

Because, if there seems to be little chance of saving whats left and the reapers are transforming Earth to a planetary version of the Collector Base to use as a stronghold and reaper production facility for taking the rest of the galaxy, there is little to win and much to lose by not denying the enemy a planet full of food.

This may sound awfully cold and I'm not sure I could take such a decision in real life but you shouldn't leave valuable resources in the enemys hands. By a similar logic you can support not risking the base to do more harm by exploding it.

[tywinsregards]

But even still that was a DIRECT blow aimed DIRECTLY at that one reaper and it still did major damaged to its surface. If that happen on earth u wouldnt have to worry about aiming at earth at all cause there still gona be screwed. and to lovgreno's point it wouldnt seem that bad of an option if u cant stop them but the whole point of the game is to take back earth and defeat the reapers. oh and ME1, you failed if you didnt save the council BUT it could work out in the end. ME3 fail seems more like itll be the council saying screw humanity and they let earth be destroyed and fight the reapers themselves.
EDIT: my bad it was aimed at the atmosphere i think its still unknown whether it was a direct blow or not

Modifié par lgeass88, 15 décembre 2010 - 01:20 .