"Mandatory" side missions

[Imyo]

I was wondering wich side missions experienced players know are mandatory to the correct flow of the trilogy, mostly in mass effect 1, i played it on normal difficulty and finished it and it felt wrong plus i missed some side quests like Garru's loyalty mission without knowing, even tho i tried to go for full completionist.

I will replay it on insanity trying to roleplay as much as possible for the Shepard i have in my mind, a paragon that get things done trying to get as few kills as possible, with a particular hate towards mercs in a weird way. This limits the side missions i will be willing to accept, that means no fetch small quests that will only waste time derailing Shepard from the main objective.

But on the other hand, i dont want to screw the trilogy by doing this, so im asking you, the experts, wich missions are mandatory to get a decent game experience in mass effect 2 and 3 later on. Things like Conrad that last for the complete trilogy for example (i wont be doing that particular one i think tho, but missions like that, that carry on between games), also Lore heavy missions like all the cerberus ones will be done, or Rogue VI for class specialization.

I dont mind any spoilers, i played the game twice already when it came out, i may be missing a bit of dlc content tho.

[M E T A L]

If you don't mind spoilers, I highly recommend you follow IGN's walkthrough. The "Side Quests" section in particular is very accurate.

https://www.ign.com/wikis/mass-effect/Side_Quests

And to know the exact Paragon/Renegade requirement for each confrontation you can check the "Morality Guide" in the ME wikia:

https://masseffect.fandom.com/wiki/Morality_Guide

[barzai]

Based on your description of how you're roleplaying Shep, it pains me to say you should skip both Garrus's and Wrex's ME1 loyalty missions. I mean...seriously? You want me to take time out from my busy schedule to go hunt down some trophy-hunter and recover a suit of armore you admit upfront has no real utility? Or go after a freakazoid Dr. Mengele-type guy just because? Nah.

Conversely I think it's completely appropriate to do most or all of Hackett's N7 missions. I mean...you ARE Alliance, right? And in the N7 program--the closest thing mankind has to the Spectres--right? To say nothing of the fact that Hackett IS you superior officer by several large rungs, even if he's not actually in your chain of command. And most of the missions he wants you to undertake are on point--busting up the Geth, busting up Cerberus, that kind of thing.

Ironically, by doing the N7 missions you will position yourself unknowingly to help Tali with HER loyalty mission, so there's that, too.

Incidentally, I should alert you to the fact that not doing Wrex's loyalty mission may have consequences as early as ME1. 'Nuff said.

Garrus...not so much: that guy's loyal to the core, he's the Varric of Mass Effect. He'll follow you into Hell across all three games come Hell or high water. Ditto Tali.

Oh...and the only relevant DLC in ME1 is Bring Down The Sky, on Asteroid X57. And you have access to it from the moment you venture out into the galaxy. But I usually save it for late in the game on account of the goodies you can get: a very superior Omni-Tool if you really need or want it--though you can acquire as good or better in the game, another reason to do the mission late--and otherwise some really nice Quarian armor, which is otherwise really hard to find.

Opinions vary on X57. I like the mission a lot, it's well-designed and shows the impact of "lessons-learned" from the original game/level design. But others have lower opinions of it. YMMV.

[Imyo]

Originally posted by barzai:

Based on your description of how you're roleplaying Shep, it pains me to say you should skip both Garrus's and Wrex's ME1 loyalty missions. I mean...seriously? You want me to take time out from my busy schedule to go hunt down some trophy-hunter and recover a suit of armore you admit upfront has no real utility? Or go after a freakazoid Dr. Mengele-type guy just because? Nah.

Conversely I think it's completely appropriate to do most or all of Hackett's N7 missions. I mean...you ARE Alliance, right? And in the N7 program--the closest thing mankind has to the Spectres--right? To say nothing of the fact that Hackett IS you superior officer by several large rungs, even if he's not actually in your chain of command. And most of the missions he wants you to undertake are on point--busting up the Geth, busting up Cerberus, that kind of thing.

Ironically, by doing the N7 missions you will position yourself unknowingly to help Tali with HER loyalty mission, so there's that, too.

Incidentally, I should alert you to the fact that not doing Wrex's loyalty mission may have consequences as early as ME1. 'Nuff said.

Garrus...not so much: that guy's loyal to the core, he's the Varric of Mass Effect. He'll follow you into Hell across all three games come Hell or high water. Ditto Tali.

Oh...and the only relevant DLC in ME1 is Bring Down The Sky, on Asteroid X57. And you have access to it from the moment you venture out into the galaxy. But I usually save it for late in the game on account of the goodies you can get: a very superior Omni-Tool if you really need or want it--though you can acquire as good or better in the game, another reason to do the mission late--and otherwise some really nice Quarian armor, which is otherwise really hard to find.

Opinions vary on X57. I like the mission a lot, it's well-designed and shows the impact of "lessons-learned" from the original game/level design. But others have lower opinions of it. YMMV.

Thanks a lot man for taking the time, im rethinking my version of shepard then, at least enough to consider both wrex and garrus missions apropiate, I can come up with a roleplaying reason to help a squadmate tho, but i cant come up with a reason for my shepard to be willing to help a hanar smuggle items for profit for example it just doesnt seem right. And im still devating with myself if i should waste time surveying planets, i know the exp and credits make it worth it, but it feels like delaying the main mission quite a lot.

[tahunua]

you really don't need any side quests in ME1, unlike ME2, skipping a loyalty mission won't result in the death of a follower.
1. fetching wrex's armor makes it easier to avoid killing him on virmire. since you're avoiding side quests, you probably won't max paragon or renegade points (unless you use the exploit on noveria), so this fetch quest will probably be in your best interests.

Wrex's survival doesn't change much for ME2's gameplay but the context of how you go about it is pretty major. without Wrex in ME3, it's a huge let down for the possible future of the Krogan People. Wreav is a pretty poor stand in for Wrex, and was a good choice by the writers IMO.

2. Helena Blake will show up in ME2 if you do her quest and choose to spare her so that's a nice cameo.
3. Conrad Verner makes a funny appearance in ME2 if you go through his little side bits.
4. if you helped Rita get out of Chora's den, and did the Conrad Verner stuff in ME1 and 2, then Rita will save Conrad's life in ME3.
5. if you do the bring down the sky DLC, then in ME3, Balak and Shepard will know each other personally instead of by reputation and will be more combative toward one another, but ultimately doesn't change your options for resolving the conflict.
6. if you kill Nassana's sister in ME1, she will comment about it when you run into her in ME2, and I think you have the opportunity to make a snide comment when someone says there are rumors that she had her sister killed, but it doesn't stop thane from killing her.
7. killing the rachni queen, has long term negative consequences. saving her adds a small conversation to ME2, but killing her doesn't prevent rachni from showing up in ME3 as Reaper minions.
8. working with the internal affairs officer on noveria adds a small side quest in ME2, but doesn't seem to affect anything.
9. saving the feros colonists will add a small side mission in ME2, and adds some war assets in ME3 depending on how the ME2 plays out.
10. fighting the geth incursion and giving the data to Tali (a serious time sink), will make it easier to convince tali that you're really shepard in ME2, and convince her to work with you, but ultimately will not change anything in how freedoms progress turns out.

that's really about it. just about any other consequences of side quests are just seen in the form of emails sent to Shepard throughout ME2 and ME3, and a few war assets sprinkled in here and there.

ME1 while a very respectable RPG by 2007 standards, I think was more of a proof of concept than anything, testing audiences desire for an original sci-fi RPG, and over-the-shoulder shooter. when responses were positive enough toward the world building, but lots of room for improvement in the level design and combat, they turned it into a prequel of sorts and made ME2, the gritty, scifi, RPG, with grave consequences to your actions, and did their best to tie in your decision making from ME1. ultimately the best thing about ME in general is that there is no "correct" progression. ME1 has a decidedly renegade ending, while ME2 has a decidedly Paragon ending. canonically the only squad members who survive ME2 are mordin, Miranda, Garrus, and Tali, but if you save all of them, the ending is so much more sweet than bitter. players who go through the whole series destined to make decisions that the canonical shepard will not, so there's no reason to aim for the "continuity ending". it's all about the story that you want to tell through shepard.

[Imyo]

Originally posted by tahunua:

you really don't need any side quests in ME1, unlike ME2, skipping a loyalty mission won't result in the death of a follower.
1. fetching wrex's armor makes it easier to avoid killing him on virmire. since you're avoiding side quests, you probably won't max paragon or renegade points (unless you use the exploit on noveria), so this fetch quest will probably be in your best interests.

Wrex's survival doesn't change much for ME2's gameplay but the context of how you go about it is pretty major. without Wrex in ME3, it's a huge let down for the possible future of the Krogan People. Wreav is a pretty poor stand in for Wrex, and was a good choice by the writers IMO.

2. Helena Blake will show up in ME2 if you do her quest and choose to spare her so that's a nice cameo.
3. Conrad Verner makes a funny appearance in ME2 if you go through his little side bits.
4. if you helped Rita get out of Chora's den, and did the Conrad Verner stuff in ME1 and 2, then Rita will save Conrad's life in ME3.
5. if you do the bring down the sky DLC, then in ME3, Balak and Shepard will know each other personally instead of by reputation and will be more combative toward one another, but ultimately doesn't change your options for resolving the conflict.
6. if you kill Nassana's sister in ME1, she will comment about it when you run into her in ME2, and I think you have the opportunity to make a snide comment when someone says there are rumors that she had her sister killed, but it doesn't stop thane from killing her.
7. killing the rachni queen, has long term negative consequences. saving her adds a small conversation to ME2, but killing her doesn't prevent rachni from showing up in ME3 as Reaper minions.
8. working with the internal affairs officer on noveria adds a small side quest in ME2, but doesn't seem to affect anything.
9. saving the feros colonists will add a small side mission in ME2, and adds some war assets in ME3 depending on how the ME2 plays out.
10. fighting the geth incursion and giving the data to Tali (a serious time sink), will make it easier to convince tali that you're really shepard in ME2, and convince her to work with you, but ultimately will not change anything in how freedoms progress turns out.

that's really about it. just about any other consequences of side quests are just seen in the form of emails sent to Shepard throughout ME2 and ME3, and a few war assets sprinkled in here and there.

ME1 while a very respectable RPG by 2007 standards, I think was more of a proof of concept than anything, testing audiences desire for an original sci-fi RPG, and over-the-shoulder shooter. when responses were positive enough toward the world building, but lots of room for improvement in the level design and combat, they turned it into a prequel of sorts and made ME2, the gritty, scifi, RPG, with grave consequences to your actions, and did their best to tie in your decision making from ME1. ultimately the best thing about ME in general is that there is no "correct" progression. ME1 has a decidedly renegade ending, while ME2 has a decidedly Paragon ending. canonically the only squad members who survive ME2 are mordin, Miranda, Garrus, and Tali, but if you save all of them, the ending is so much more sweet than bitter. players who go through the whole series destined to make decisions that the canonical shepard will not, so there's no reason to aim for the "continuity ending". it's all about the story that you want to tell through shepard.

I really apreciate all this information, it gives me some sort of peace of mind. I dont mind negative consecuences to my choices (like the rachni that carries to me3) as long as there ARE consecuences to begin with. I remember playing the game kind of rushing it the first time (years ago) and just finding out what the f Cerberus was when i started ME2, but in reality they are everywhere in ME1, i just missed it, and thats the sort of thing that is important for me this time around.

[tahunua]

I started playing ME2 first, a buddy bought it and it couldn't run on his laptop so he gifted it to me. I had a bit of trouble getting into it because I didn't know who the Geth were, what Cerberus was, what the council was, who Saren, or what sovereign and the reapers were, but I stuck with it and fell in love with it, and didn't really understand why everyone hated cerberus, so I bought ME1, and learned the truth, and that completely changed strained or onimous ME2 endings with the illusive man and I was much more prepared for what they did in ME3.

[GoreTiger]

Originally posted by tahunua:

you really don't need any side quests in ME1, unlike ME2, skipping a loyalty mission won't result in the death of a follower.
1. fetching wrex's armor makes it easier to avoid killing him on virmire. since you're avoiding side quests, you probably won't max paragon or renegade points (unless you use the exploit on noveria), so this fetch quest will probably be in your best interests.

Wrex's survival doesn't change much for ME2's gameplay but the context of how you go about it is pretty major. without Wrex in ME3, it's a huge let down for the possible future of the Krogan People. Wreav is a pretty poor stand in for Wrex, and was a good choice by the writers IMO.

2. Helena Blake will show up in ME2 if you do her quest and choose to spare her so that's a nice cameo.
3. Conrad Verner makes a funny appearance in ME2 if you go through his little side bits.
4. if you helped Rita get out of Chora's den, and did the Conrad Verner stuff in ME1 and 2, then Rita will save Conrad's life in ME3.
5. if you do the bring down the sky DLC, then in ME3, Balak and Shepard will know each other personally instead of by reputation and will be more combative toward one another, but ultimately doesn't change your options for resolving the conflict.
6. if you kill Nassana's sister in ME1, she will comment about it when you run into her in ME2, and I think you have the opportunity to make a snide comment when someone says there are rumors that she had her sister killed, but it doesn't stop thane from killing her.
7. killing the rachni queen, has long term negative consequences. saving her adds a small conversation to ME2, but killing her doesn't prevent rachni from showing up in ME3 as Reaper minions.
8. working with the internal affairs officer on noveria adds a small side quest in ME2, but doesn't seem to affect anything.
9. saving the feros colonists will add a small side mission in ME2, and adds some war assets in ME3 depending on how the ME2 plays out.
10. fighting the geth incursion and giving the data to Tali (a serious time sink), will make it easier to convince tali that you're really shepard in ME2, and convince her to work with you, but ultimately will not change anything in how freedoms progress turns out.

that's really about it. just about any other consequences of side quests are just seen in the form of emails sent to Shepard throughout ME2 and ME3, and a few war assets sprinkled in here and there.

ME1 while a very respectable RPG by 2007 standards, I think was more of a proof of concept than anything, testing audiences desire for an original sci-fi RPG, and over-the-shoulder shooter. when responses were positive enough toward the world building, but lots of room for improvement in the level design and combat, they turned it into a prequel of sorts and made ME2, the gritty, scifi, RPG, with grave consequences to your actions, and did their best to tie in your decision making from ME1. ultimately the best thing about ME in general is that there is no "correct" progression. ME1 has a decidedly renegade ending, while ME2 has a decidedly Paragon ending. canonically the only squad members who survive ME2 are mordin, Miranda, Garrus, and Tali, but if you save all of them, the ending is so much more sweet than bitter. players who go through the whole series destined to make decisions that the canonical shepard will not, so there's no reason to aim for the "continuity ending". it's all about the story that you want to tell through shepard.

A lot of ME1's small questlines can equate to war assets in 3. Some minor, some major, but all can matter when trying to get that perfect number. Saving the geth queen adds a big chunk of war points in 3. I'm not 100% sure but I think Grunt's survival also relies on the queen being alive as well.

[tahunua]

Grunt, Jack, Jacob, Zaeed, and Kasumi are all actually guaranteed to survive. if they didn't survive ME2, then they are replaced by other characters who are guaranteed to die performing the same heroic acts.

[barzai]

Originally posted by tahunua:

Grunt, Jack, Jacob, Zaeed, and Kasumi are all actually guaranteed to survive. if they didn't survive ME2, then they are replaced by other characters who are guaranteed to die performing the same heroic acts.

What exactly do you mean when you say "guaranteed to survive"? "Guaranteed to survive" WHAT, exactly?

Jack and Kasumi can both die on the Normandy during the approach to the Collector base. Grunt and Jacob can both die during the actual mission. Zaeed I don't know for sure.

And as far as replacements go:

- Jack gets "replaced" by one of her students.
- Grunt gets "replaced" by Dagg, who always dies where Grunt can live.
- Jacob gets "replaced" by one of the ex-Cerberus scientists who's even more boring than Jacob is.
- Kasumi and Zaeed--as befits their contingent status as DLC--don't get replaced at all.

It's certainly true that the replacements for Jack, Grunt and Jacob don't really affect the mission outcomes--other than the additional casualties, which evidently don't concern you. But with Kasumi and Zaeed gone and NOT replaced, you are deprived of the best possible endings to the mini-missions in which they play a role.

So...I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here.

[tahunua]

I mean they are guaranteed to survive their missions in ME3... obviously my second sentence acknowledges that they can die in ME2. it's been a while since I've played ME3 without them but I'm pretty sure the Spectre tracking Kasumi dies trying to stop the Hanar virus, and... I guess you have me on Zaeed, I don't remember running into that mission without him.

so what I'm saying is... if they survive into ME3... they are guaranteed to survive... whoa... deja vu.

[barzai]

Originally posted by tahunua:

I mean they are guaranteed to survive their missions in ME3... obviously my second sentence acknowledges that they can die in ME2. it's been a while since I've played ME3 without them but I'm pretty sure the Spectre tracking Kasumi dies trying to stop the Hanar virus, and... I guess you have me on Zaeed, I don't remember running into that mission without him.

so what I'm saying is... if they survive into ME3... they are guaranteed to survive... whoa... deja vu.

Ah, thanks for clarifying that. Also, my apology for misunderstanding your earlier post.

Losing Kasumi or Zaeed means you lose the "best" outcome where you save both the Hanar homeworld AND the Salarian Spectre, or you save both the Turian colony AND get the Volus Bomber Fleet. Not catastrophic to be sure, but not great either.