My understanding is that it is. In any case I didn't get the dialogue option for peace and they both died.
I did all that maybe I didn't have enough renegade/paragon, it was a mish mash of both so meh. Still didn't get the prompt was a nightmare play through anyway just glad I had more than one.
When shep got spaced, and then resurrected, in the beginning of ME2. I love ME2 and I still sink a lot of hours into it, especially now that I've been doing trilogy runs. I'd love to give it ME3 style combat, get rid of that ridiculous fatigue thing, and then add ME3 combos too. Tech explosions on 'mechs? Hell yes.
But from the time shep wakes up on Lazarus Station until she first picks a destination on the galaxy map, I kept thinking, isn't Cerberus just some rogue ex-Alliance ***holes? Where the **** did all this come from? Even if it has been two years, it's only been two years.
It's not.
You have to save Koris, do the fighter squadron mission, solve the dispute in ME2 and Tali cannot be exiled during her LM.
I've never destroyed the Heretics so far, achieved peace every time except the last run (where peace was impossible anyway because I didn't save Koris, chose the Geth)
You can destroy the heretics and still get peace. I did that in my current game. Destroying the heretics has no effect on the Rannoch resolution... I think it's just a difference in war assets.
You can destroy the heretics and still get peace. I did that in my current game. Destroying the heretics has no effect on the Rannoch resolution... I think it's just a difference in war assets.
Destroying them improves the chance of peace (+2 points), meaning you can skip on saving Koris (or that mission altogether) and still get peace
Destroying them improves the chance of peace (+2 points), meaning you can skip on saving Koris (or that mission altogether) and still get peace
Oh, sorry man, I misread your post.
It's not.
You have to save Koris, do the fighter squadron mission, solve the dispute in ME2 and Tali cannot be exiled during her LM.
I've never destroyed the Heretics so far, achieved peace every time except the last run (where peace was impossible anyway because I didn't save Koris, chose the Geth)
Actually, the only pass/fail requirements are
1) to have Legion and Tali both present, but with the latter having not been exiled because then she won't be able to back you up against Gerrel using her position on the Admiralty Board.
2) Rannoch: Geth Fighter Squadrons completed
3) 4 full bars of reputation
If you lack any of this, you can't force a truce no matter what else you do. If you meet these requirements, then you have multiple options to reach a truce. The way it works is that certain actions in ME2 and ME3 have set point values contributing to the resolution, and you must acquire at least 5 of them
+2 points for destroying the heretics in ME2: Contrary to your playthroughs, destroying the heretics is actually the preferable decision (considering total war assets are the same in a truce no matter which you choose in ME2)
+2 points for Exonerating Tali Without revealing her father Rael's experiments to the admiralty board in ME2 (don't pick the non reputation renegade choice. As an aside, it also causes you to lose Tali's loyalty, and she is among the most difficult to save non loyal squadmates in the SM with Mordin and Kasumi, which could potentially lock you out of being able to force a truce completely)
1+ point for resolving Tali/ Legion omni tool data argument in ME2 (note that you have to use a reputation check during the argument, and even siding with Tali initially but regaining Legion's loyalty via the renegade check in a later conversation will not get you the point even though Legion will be loyal again.)
1+ point for completing Rannoch: Admiral Koris
1+ for actually saving Koris during the mission.
Thus you could let Koris die or not even do his mission provided you gained all the points from the other 3 requirements, but that is normally impossible unless (excluding the decision to save Legion) you did a pure renegade-choices playthrough in ME2 due to the way its morality system works (as destroying the Heretics will almost certianly lock you out of being able to get Tali and Legion to reconcile if you are a paragon due to the extremely high reputation requirement and the fact that destroying the heretics gains you so many renegade points.)
As an aside, I only ever saved the heretics once. Synthetics are bad enough without creepily worshiping the harbingers of galactic doom.
When Mirada shoot Wilson i knew right away that ME 2 was going to be a "Michael Bay" game - up until that point i though the whole ressurection thing was actually pretty neat and would lead somewhere interesting storywise, man was i wrong.
Again, I disagree completely. I'd say that it's a fine sequel to ME1. ME3 not following it is not ME2's fault. I don't believe in the purpose of retroactive blaming for everything that went wrong.
Were there flaws? Of course. But was it the story/narrative breaking that limited the progression and acceptable possibility for ME3? No, I don't think it was at all.
Actually, the only pass/fail requirements are
1) to have Legion and Tali both present, but with the latter having not been exiled because then she won't be able to back you up against Gerrel using her position on the Admiralty Board.
2) Rannoch: Geth Fighter Squadrons completed
3) 4 full bars of reputation
If you lack any of this, you can't force a truce no matter what else you do. If you meet these requirements, then you have multiple options to reach a truce. The way it works is that certain actions in ME2 and ME3 have set point values contributing to the resolution, and you must acquire at least 5 of them
+2 points for destroying the heretics in ME2: Contrary to your playthroughs, destroying the heretics is actually the preferable decision (considering total war assets are the same in a truce no matter which you choose in ME2)
+2 points for Exonerating Tali Without revealing her father Rael's experiments to the admiralty board in ME2 (don't pick the non reputation renegade choice. As an aside, it also causes you to lose Tali's loyalty, and she is among the most difficult to save non loyal squadmates in the SM with Mordin and Kasumi, which could potentially lock you out of being able to force a truce completely)
1+ point for resolving Tali/ Legion omni tool data argument in ME2 (note that you have to use a reputation check during the argument, and even siding with Tali initially but regaining Legion's loyalty via the renegade check in a later conversation will not get you the point even though Legion will be loyal again.)
1+ point for completing Rannoch: Admiral Koris
1+ for actually saving Koris during the mission.
Thus you could let Koris die or not even do his mission provided you gained all the points from the other 3 requirements, but that is normally impossible unless (excluding the decision to save Legion) you did a pure renegade-choices playthrough in ME2 due to the way its morality system works (as destroying the Heretics will almost certianly lock you out of being able to get Tali and Legion to reconcile if you are a paragon due to the extremely high reputation requirement and the fact that destroying the heretics gains you so many renegade points.)
As an aside, I only ever saved the heretics once. Synthetics are bad enough without creepily worshiping the harbingers of galactic doom.
And how is this different from what I said? I could not achieve peace after rewriting the Heretics and not saving Koris, which agrees with what you said.
pardon me if I misread but I thought you were saying that saving Koris is a pass/fail requirement? It isn't, in fact you can technically not even bother to do his mission if you get all the 5 points from Tali/Legion's Loyalty missions and get them to reconcile their argument.
pardon me if I misread but I thought you were saying that saving Koris is a pass/fail requirement? It isn't, in fact you can technically not even bother to do his mission if you get all the 5 points from Tali/Legion's Loyalty missions and get them to reconcile their argument.
It is a requirement if you rewrite the Heretics, as you can't reach 5 points otherwise.
I knew I shouldn't have brought up GQ peace. It only ever ends this way....
Question the plot? I did have some issues with the Crucible, although some of the chatter on Mars alleviated that a little bit: I was reminded that it took them over a millenia to completely destroy the Protheans. So, seriously, the Protheans had to try something crazy.
I started to question it when I was playing, and was talking to Hackett the first time I could interrogate him, and I realized: How the hell is this Crucible thingy going to work? We've got crap all over the galaxy. If we use it on Earth, since that's where we seem to be going, what are we going to do about Palaven.
Other than that, I questioned the need to constantly worship the krogan and the asari.
Structure is unimportant, design means the same thing as structure, purpose and motivation are the same thing, and any methods that aren't combat based don't mean anything.
You actually say "my government"? That's a first. I've never heard anyone other person say that. Maybe our, but never my. Hmm. But you don't refute the Chekov's Gun? That the whole point of making the Council a bunch of idiots was to justify Cerberus? Well then. There you go.
The Human reaper is 1/20 of the length of an actual Reaper, and way smaller. The Collectors have supposedly been doing their collection for two years, seeing as Cerberus felt the need to bring Shepard back to life. Even if the Collectors have been processing for one year, or six months, it'll still take decades to complete going at that rate.
It doesn't ****** matter what the technology level of the Normandy is. It doesn't ****** matter. It's 1/4 the length of a cruiser, which matters a whole lot when dealing with spinal-mounted mass accelerators, The Normandy, with the Thanix upgrade, is explicitly stated to have the firepower of a cruiser. Does it not? Okay, let's go for a direct quote.It's simple math. X = X. If the firepower of a cruiser is capable of annihilating the Collector Cruiser in two shots, then a cruiser is capable of annihilating the Collector Cruiser in two shots. It's just simple math.
In the actual cutscene there is wreckage of a single Turian ship. One. And it's small, likely a frigate in size. You're making assumptions without any evidence to back them up.
Advanced military doesn't mean large, or good military. Kinda like, even if Jamaica had a US military technological level, it wouldn't be a threat to Mexico.
So you're willfully dismissing any information about the Reapers that isn't based around their combat ability? That's ridiculous. You'd dismiss any information that didn't help you get into the psychology of the Reapers and understanding what they're trying to do and why they're trying to do it. Understanding how they're built via design and structure (not one and the same mind you as any person who's every taken an engineering course will tell you) does inform you of their capabilities and what weaknesses might be exploited. To say that these are irrelevant is ludicrous: you're trying to dismiss this point because it would mean that you actually learned something.
Yes, I use a possessive term instead of a general referential one, especially when I talk to people who are not of my nationality (kinda similar to how the Asari councilor is referring to her government to a human). Your argument to incredulity is not a valid point. And because I don't mention your next statement means I don't concede the point? Think again: The council always struck me as blind morons from the very beginning who would rather ignore the problem when things didn't add up than deal with it. What's wrong with it justifying Cerberus? Does it offend your paragon sensibilities? Are you upset that you have to work for people who actually have resolve to deal with the problem? To do whatever it takes to deal with the problem?
This claim is unsubstantiated. It's dismissed.
Are you kidding me? Technology absolutely matters. Your argument that experimental technology based on a weapon that is of Reaper origin is at all comparable to a Cruiser (which uses more conventional systems of armament) doesn't acknowledge the effectiveness of conventional weapons on the Collectors. The Cruiser isn't going to have the same kind of weapons or technological sophistication of the Normandy. And that quote is one that can be undermined: The Normandy has a weapon that gives it a substantial punch compared to a ship of its size standard armaments (I'm ignoring the scales you're presenting as unsubstantiated until you prove otherwise). See, Thanix is a weapon based off of a Reapers primary weapon; it's a molten stream of metallic magma being pushed to a fraction of the speed of light. It's a thermal based weapon as well as kinetic that either ignores or violently tears through standard barriers. Meanwhile, a Cruiser has much more standard particle accelerators. Thanix may well be able to deliver comparable damage to a Cruiser, but that does not mean that the weapons systems are equivalent. That's like comparing an Arleigh-Burke class Destroyer to an Iowa Class Battleship in terms of firepower and capability. This goes beyond simple math and adding two and two. I reiterate, 1) we never see the Collector ship engaged in combat actions with anything other than a Frigate (the most technologically advanced and fastest warship ever built by the current cycle, with the speed, agility, and maneuverability of a fighter and the firepower of a larger warship) so your claim has no testable substance to it in the first place, and 2) the comparison of capabilities in said Frigate compared to a standard cruiser that has none of its advantages or advanced technology is unjust. Just because the Normandy has the rough equivalent damage output of a Cruiser does not mean that it is the same kind of beast, or vice versa.
Pause directly at 2:50. You will see the remains of at least two warships. One is in frame at the center-left image just under the left side of the Collector Cruiser, and the other is in the upper-right hand side of the frame, a little to the left of the star's corona. And they are visible for about 5 seconds, so you have plenty of time to pause and observe both. Again, at 28:55, another destroyed ship comes into frame at the bottom center of the screen, right as the Normandy is fleeing. The Collector Cruiser rather obviously slams against the wreckage and you can see the parts of the ship being pushed around. As the ships have both been moving (away from where they were in the beginning of the mission) this is a third ship from the others. So there were at least 3 Turian patrol vessels in this sequence, completely disproving your point.
Oh ho, I do beg to differ. Advanced military may not necessarily mean large military, but it does mean a capable military. Your point on Jamaica: actually, it very much could be a potential threat to Mexico if they had U.S. technology. That would mean they have our technology for power projection, advanced stealth fighter aircraft, and capabilities on land, sea, undersea, air, and space. Look at countries like the United Kingdom? That little island up in the north-western part of Europe? Would you believe that for nearly 300 years they had the most powerful Navy in the world, and had the most widespread and influential empire in recorded history? Or South Korea and Japan. Neither are particularly large or anywhere close in terms of scale to their close neighbor China (who is known for their rather large and powerful military), yet they still regard both Japan and the Republic of Korea as a threat. Mainly because of their advanced militaries (or 'Self-Defense Force' for the Japanese). Or Taiwan: China still views Taiwan as a technological threat. They aren't going to be winning against them anytime soon, but Taiwan has more than enough capability to make fighting them too much of a problem for the PRC.
The problem is, Massively, that given your mancrush on Cerberus and devotion to Miranda's arse it's difficult to take your views on the merit of ME2 seriously.
The problem is von uber that you're unfairly dismissing my views on the merits of ME2 by making statements like this instead of actually taking my points into consideration.
I have views that you don't like. So you claim I'm not being realistic when I support the game that lets you follow these views.
Yet you too have views I think are childish. Yet you don't see me antagonizing you or your views on the games because of it. That's just you being an ass here.
I don't know, when I was doing my first playthrough there was the odd little thing that had me go "okay...". Little things like EDI's silly body and the Joker romance, but overall I just went along with most things. You know, excluding the ending. Then when I finished I started thinking and things began sticking out.
Since I enjoyed it more when I was thinking less about it maybe it means I shouldn't think so hard about things. But no, if a story can't stand up to analysis the story's got a problem tbh.
The problem is von uber that you're unfairly dismissing my views on the merits of ME2 by making statements like this instead of actually taking my points into consideration.
I have views that you don't like. So you claim I'm not being realistic when I support the game that lets you follow these views.
Yet you too have views I think are childish. Yet you don't see me antagonizing you or your views on the games because of it. That's just you being an ass here.
I'm not saying your views are childish, my point is that given your known biases towards both cerberus and 'Queen' Miranda it is only natural that you will find less faults in a game where they are the primary antagonists.
You can call that being an ass if you want (although arse sounds better) and that is your perogative, however you have to accept that not everybody agrees with your position nor is necessarily cowed into accepting it through your aggressive posting style.
Make yourself a cup of tea, have a custard cream and relax. It's only a game..
Hard to call them antagonists since they're quite plainly on your side the entire game. As well, using dismissive language like 'queen' is rather childish regarding my opinion.
I do call you being an ass (and it sounds better than arse). I never disputed that sentiment, but I did dispute when people called my opinion into question. And really, if that's your perspective of me, you should probably be the one calming down if you think I resort to bulverism. You yourself are resorting to a statements against me personally.
And if you're going to use that excuse, then why bother to debate or talk about this? It's easy to throw out your opinion and then throw your hands up saying 'but who care's? It's only a game!' That language in an argument indicates that you yourself are resorting to a dismissive appeal. So how goes the statements against me when you're practicing them as well?
It's not.
You have to save Koris, do the fighter squadron mission, solve the dispute in ME2 and Tali cannot be exiled during her LM.
I've never destroyed the Heretics so far, achieved peace every time except the last run (where peace was impossible anyway because I didn't save Koris, chose the Geth)
Since I enjoyed it more when I was thinking less about it maybe it means I shouldn't think so hard about things. But no, if a story can't stand up to analysis the story's got a problem tbh.
But once they get into Citadel space, then what? Are they going to somehow plow through the fleets there?
Obviously:
"THEY"RE GOING TO HIT EARTH!!!!"
With one cruiser...
Bio plots generally can't stand up to analysis. The trick is to keep players from analyzing them.
Failed on both counts, then
When Shepard insists that she's going to find a way to stop the Reapers at the end of ME1, the reaper fleet approaching the galaxy at the end of ME2, and Shepard having nothing to really say to the defense council before they die.
Good point there KaiserShep -- I thought that was rediculously strange too.
YOU WOULD THINK -- that when the 3 of them where talking to Vigil on Ilos, at least ONE of the three would have enough sense to use their OmniTool to record the conversation to bring back. 
Retour en haut