Mass Effect Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Mass Effect Wiki

This is the talk page for M-98 Widow.
Please limit discussions to topics that go into improving the article.
If you wish to discuss matters not relevant to article upkeep, take it to the blogs, forums,
Discord chat, or discussions module.
Thank you.

I just want to state, for posterity, that I LOVE THIS GUN.

I wish ME1 had the slow-mo mechanic with its sniper rifles. Made them nearly useless except for bushwhacking guard NPCs from mountaintops in planet exploration mode.

Archangelm127 02:45, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

This page is for discussion of the article, not gushing about using the gun. But yes, using the Widow with adrenaline rush is awesome.Tophvision 03:02, March 12, 2010 (UTC)
Ah. My apologies. ArchangelM127 08:08, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Design Similarities and Basis - M82 Barrett?[]

So I was doing some random websurfing and the like, and after reviewing the trivia at the page for the Locust, and some of the research done there about the similarities, I decided to see if the Widow had something similar; IE, a RL basis for the weapon stock design, if modified. And I believe I found it.

The Barret M82.

Take note specifically of the 'original' model on the 2nd picture of that page. While the slimmer portion of the barrel is not nearly as long, much of that is very, very close to it, if not modeled pretty close to it, in particular the hexagonal portion of the main body.

Thoughts?

There are some superficial similarities, but also a lot of differences too. The Widow is much bulkier, which is very evident around the barrel, as there is no noticeable slimming of the weapon either in front of or behind the main body of the weapon (ie around the barrel and the stock). The sight of the Widow is an integrated component, which is not the case for the Barret. The most obvious difference is, of course, the prominent magazine of the Barret and the equally prominent lack thereof on the Widow. The bipod is much farther back on the Barret, and is much larger, and there is what appears to be an iron sight on the Widow just behind the barrel, which is lacking on the Barret. I haven't really seen any real-life ARM that looks much like the Widow (other than extremely common and superficial similarities that can be found on just about any ARM) but if I had to pick, I'd say the closest match is the McMillan Tac-50. SpartHawg948 20:14, April 22, 2010 (UTC)
to me it looks more like a barett m99 sawed off.

Unlocking Widow for Shepard[]

The page isn't entirely clear, so I'll ask here: If I research the Widow upgrade for Legion, will that allow my (Infiltrator) Shepard to use it as well? Or do I have to pick it in the Collector Ship mission to get a Shepard-usable Widow? --Darth l33t 03:40, May 8, 2010 (UTC)

I just found out for myself -- Buying the Widow for Legion only gives it to him, not Shepard. I would assume Grunt's Claymore shotgun works the same way. --Darth l33t 20:51, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

Can we add a line in the Acquisition section that you can only acquire the Widow by choosing it on the Collector Ship?????[]

I came on this page specifically to add this one sentence because I had thought I could get the Widow without choosing it on the Collector Ship by talking to Legion after I had visited this page earlier. I chose the Revenant on the Ship only to found out that I still didn't have the Widow after talking with Legion.

So was the earlier version of this article accurate? Yes. But is it possible that someone could misread that Shepard could get the Widow from talking with Legion? Well, that bullet point is under the "Acquisition" section, I mean, isn't it also possible that a lot of people would think the "Acquisition" is for the player when he/she sees the word?

I think if we can add only one sentence and everything is unambiguous, then why not?

So what is so ambiguous about "Conversing with Legion about upgrades will make the weapon available for research. Only Legion can use this Widow." (Emephsis added). I really fail to see why this is so ambigous as it seems to work just fine on the Claymore page. Lancer1289 05:49, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
Well, user Darth l33t apparently was also confused about this issue, seeing that he has also raised a the question in the previous section on this very talk page. If the issue was as clear as you say it was, why would he need to ask the question at all. I just fail to understand why add one single senctence, which would clear things up, is that big a deal. So we cannot change this article in any way??
(edit conflict)Please take talk page comments in context with their time stamp. When he made the edit back in May it did not reflect the current version. It did say something different at the time which I will admit was ambiguous. Then it was modified, by me, to the current version. I don't see why we need to state the obvious, and basically repeat information, especially when it is already there. Lancer1289 05:59, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

The problem, as I said earlier, was that it's under a section titled "Acquisition". For many people, this would mean "acquisition" for the player, so that's why I had that confusion. 130.216.213.184 05:55, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Mathematics behind Damage[]

In the article there is a somewhat (what I assume is) calculated aprox. damage for the M-98 Widow against enemies. What I was curious about is how this was calculated if anyone could provide insight as I have been unable to find any equations behind Damage Calculating. If anyone can help with this could you please reply witht he equation with words substituted instead of numbers. Thanks.

What is a reason for this  [sic] sign?[]

Nothing wrong with being anti-material rifle. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-material_rifle if you dont know what it means.

Your example says it all. Anti-material rifle redirects to anti-materiel rifle, the correct term. SpartHawg948 08:00, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
Then why is there  [sic] sign?
Because, as I just pointed out, using your own example, "anti-material rifle" is a non-existent term that civilians commonly use when they misspell the correct term, "anti-materiel rifle". As an error on the part of the developers, we leave it in the description, which is taken verbatim from in-game sources, but add a  [sic] tag. "Sic" means that a word or passage that appears incorrect has been knowingly included as a result of copying it directly from the original source. There are several instances of mistakes in in-game text, and when they arise, we note them with a  [sic] tag to keep people from changing them in violation of the Manual of Style. SpartHawg948 08:36, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
Right. But if that's the case, why is it that all instances of antimateriel (the correct term, with an "e") are marked with the tag, whereas the instances of antimaterial (wrong term, with an "a") are not marked? It should be the other way around.--SushiSquid (talk) 15:12, December 9, 2012 (UTC)
Ah, nevermind. This page is correct. I had seen the mistake on the Kryae page before. I guess I'll just fix that page then by removing the tag.--SushiSquid (talk) 15:13, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

ME3 Weapon[]

From what I can tell from the demo, this gun will reappear in ME3, and is equally as awesome. Should that be mentioned? That its in ME3 not that its cool. --This text has been approved by Murphy 01:00, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

We're still in the process of incorporating info from the ME3 demo. I'm about to run through the weapon articles and organize them for ME3, and the Widow is on the list. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:10, February 17, 2012 (UTC)
Just to throw this here in case, and before I forget. Before I left to eat dinner, I was playing the demo and I noticed familiar gunshots, and sure enough, one of the people I was playing with was using the Widow. It was made very apparent when he killed a Guardian through the "mail slot". Lancer1289 01:27, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Would y'all be opposed if I simply put a "Mass Effect 3" section (same as on this page) on guns I notice in the multiplayer? Because I'd be happy to. --This text has been approved by Murfitizer 04:35, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, just be careful to copy the format I've used for the other weapon pages. I think the only ME2 weapons left to be seen in ME3 (not including heavy weapons) are the Geth Pulse Rifle, Geth Plasma Shotgun, and M-29 Incisor. -- Commdor (Talk) 04:38, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the Widow (spoilers!)[]

In both the ME2 research project and the ME3 in-game description, the rifle is referred to as Geth. In addition, during the mission on Rannoch to stop Geth fighters attacking Quarian ships (I forget the name), one of the Geth memories from the original Geth rebellions shows a unit picking up the Widow, and when Shepard remarks that it is the same weapon Legion used in ME2, Legion extrapolates that it is "a very reliable weapon." This would imply, to me, that the Widow is a (very old) Quarian weapon now used by the Geth. Thoughts on editing the article? Swordser Buddy 03:09, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Interesting, but speculation, and speculation isn't permitted in articles. Even if we had more conclusive evidence, it would warrant a Trivia section entry at most. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:13, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

And yet this section still made it in. For the record, I agree that this is pure speculation. Personally I felt that Legion's remarks in that scene implied that HE was that Geth we were seeing in the scene. The way he talks about the gun seems almost reminiscent of the memory you're watching, not some inference as to the weapon's origin. I'm going to delete that because, well yeah, it's just guesswork. 50.128.192.193 06:03, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

Or whoops, that is in the trivia section. I guess I'll leave it, but regardless, I don't think that's a very solid deduction from the scene.50.128.192.193 06:05, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

A user on the Bioware Forums had a pretty good theory about the Widow's origin. Perhaps the Geth in that memory is only holding a Widow because that is what Shepard is familiar with? The Quarians all have suits despite not having them at that point because it draws from Shepard's memories. The rifle the Geth picks up could have actually been any old sniper rifle, but since it is implied to be Legion in the memory, Shepard sees it picking up a Widow because that is what (s)he remembers Legion using in ME2. --Magicman10893 17:33, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Things like this belong in the forums or a blog post as this isn't what talk pages are for. Lancer1289 20:12, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

ME3 Piercing[]

How much cover does this weapon pierce through? The Black Widow and Javelin pages give that info, but not this or the Crusader --Gimmethegepgun 19:59, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

In my experiance it is on the same level if not more, I guess it goes without saying, the Javelin does more damage but needs to charge, and the Black Widow does less damage but has 2 shots per clip, making the Widow the balance. TheRealTerminal (talk) 04:11, July 17, 2012 (UTC)

Trivia Comment[]

In the trivia, this article comments that "Anti-Material" rifle is a likely mispelling of "Anti-MateriEl". Is it not equally possible that it was a developer joke, a pun between actual anti-materiel weaponry and anti-matter weapons that seem so common in sci-fi? I think that should be commented on as a possible option, however I might be completely off. Antonioaiello1992 (talk) 20:58, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

I know this is old, but i was surfing random articles when i saw this. It is NOT a mispelling. It simply a different spelling. (Ex Armor/Armour) Unless anyone has a good reason otherwise, I intend to delete the lines. Ill wait for any reason otherwise. BeoW0lfe (talk) 18:35, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

how about no because if you're actually reading you'll see the section WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE SIC SIGN above ON THIS VERY TALKPAGE. and it has a compelling answer already a year old. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 18:40, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
ok, missed the first one, no need to be offensive. BeoW0lfe (talk) 18:42, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
And you could have also read the page and found your answer. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:10, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

Shield gate information deleted[]

I deleted the information stating that shield gate on multiplayer results in weapons, including the Widow, not doing excess damage beyond shields. This is outdated information and is now completely false, and thus has no place anywhere in this article. Official dev confirmation of the elimination can be found posted on August 28th, on this thread on the Bioware Social Forums: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/343/index/9544143/2#14248855 Yoheresmoreshow (talk)

"Anti-Material"[]

It's fairly possible that BioWare actually meant "material" and not "materiel" as a joke, because the Widow is useful against anything made of material, which is to say, everything. --107.15.119.112 18:37, March 25, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I said. Elseweyr disagreed. CaptainThunderdude (talk) 03:43, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

So do I. Lksdjf (talk) 08:51, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

I guess it's a matter of how much faith you have in the Mass Effect team's writing chops. I mean, Mass Effect is somewhat known for its writing, and this joke kind of feels very up their alley. CaptainThunderdude (talk) 03:05, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
Deciding whether or not it is a joke is not up to us, because none of us are privy to that kind of information. Everything in the game is taken at face value, because anything else amounts to speculation. If a good source says otherwise, then it goes into the trivia section, but principles of parsimony are what this wiki has adopted. Lksdjf (talk) 07:23, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
I'll bear that in mind for every single thing I read from now on. Human beings cannot be trusted to interpret information, understood.

I've got some work ahead of me.

And for the record, persimmons are very bad moral judges. We'd be far better off taking advice from squash.

I thank you for the information, friend.

CaptainThunderdude (talk) 07:26, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

ME3 banter: Legion and Shepard versus Geth VI and Shepard[]

Regarding Legion's comment that the Widow is an "efficient model" in Mass Effect 3 during Rannoch: Geth Fighter Squadrons, is there similar commentary between Shepard and the Geth VI if Legion is not present? Boct1584 (talk) 14:02, July 28, 2014 (UTC)

Advertisement