Lily Venus said:
- It's called the Catalyst. You were told exactly what its role would be in the story, and it fulfills the role you were told it would fulfill. You even get dialogue hinting at the existence of a creator of the Reapers. And it's far from a "main antagonist", given that the Catalyst never directly opposes you and willingly helps you stop the Reaper cycles, even if it involves means that it does not approve of itself. Calling it a different name doesn't magically undo foreshadowing.
No. You were told that The Catalyst is needed to complete The Crusible, not that the antagonist (the collective intelligence of all Reapers and who controls them), that somehow is in The Citadel, is needed.
Here is Vendetta explaining at 0:54 that: "At some point, it is difficult to input when, the Crusible plans were
adapted to include the use of The Catalyst (The Citadel)"
The Citadel was
never part of the plan, it was just added later to take adventaje of it. So "The Catalyst" as he refers himself to (AKA Star Child, Casper The Genocidal Ghost, Godchild), was never The Catalyst to begin with. He is only the Catalyst
now because the new design demands The Citadel to be part of The Crusible, meaning that he, the Godchild, was never created with the express function of being The Catalyst. He is instead just an AI that was created a long time ago that, somehow, happens to be part of The Citadel and that somehow just happens to be the antagonist and the one who control the Reapers too.
The 1 foreshadowing of "The Reapers are not in control of the cycle" only means that something is controlling them. It takes a giant leap in logic to say: "The one who controls them IS The Citadel, and The Citadel is The Catalyst. Therefore it is The Catalyst" but again, that is because it just happens to be there IN The Citadel, not because he was part of the design all along, or that he nessesary at all, to the point that even he says "The Crusible changed me. Created new possilibities, but i cant make them happen"
So, if he isnt nessesary then why is it here? Its like The Appendix of a human body, we dont know why the body even NEEDS this thing if it doesnt do anything. In this case, The Body (The Citadel that is The Catalyst as Vendetta says it is) is the home of The Appendix (the Godchild), but somehow The Appendix calls himself "The Body" even when its just a PART of The Body (The Godchild calling himself The Catalyst even when The Citadel IS the Catalyst)
No sane person (human or not) would waste time in designing a part of a weapon that doesnt do anything useful. And that is basically what this Godchild is, but somehow he refers itself as The Catalyst even when its only a technicality that serves no function for him or anyone.
Also, as expected from you, you a "think" that people mean Main Antagonist as: "The guy that its always on your nerves. The guy that antagonises you like the "trolls" on the forums". But sadly, that is the same logic that a Twilight fangirls would use. Why? well, because these people, when defending Bella against the argument of "she is not a strong female lead" they respond with: "That is pure lies!! she has super vampire strenght. Therefore she IS a
strong female lead"
You are taking the argument
literaly instead of thinking the context or the meaning.
"The Antagonist" is, by definition of every story ever written EVER, the thematically and ideologically opposite of "The Protagonist" OR the opposite theme or idea of what your story is about.
If, for example, Final Fantasy VI is about the celebration of life, as reflected by every main character motivation to keep going in their lives even after the world is destroyed (there is no single protagonist because everyone do their part), then the opposite is the meaningless of life as reflected by Kefka.
For Bioshock, it is reflected in the arc words of "A man chooses. A slave obeys". And the game also takes adventaje of the political overtones to demostrate the both extremes of each ideology with Andrew Ryan and Fontaine. Who by the way, were antagonist to each other in every sense of the word.
Lawful Good Vs Chaotic Evil
Vorlon Vs Shadows
The Godchild is the antagonist thematically and ideologically, even if he doesnt
antagonise you directly. Hell, most famous and memorable villains end up being the ones that manipulate everyone into thinking that HE is a friend of them, while hidding their true motivations that ultimatelly reflect the opposite of the message of the story.
But sadly, as much as you want to admit, since Godchild is the collective intelligence of all Reapers and controls them, that means that when we were talking with Sovereing and Harbinger, who antagonised us in a more traditional way by taunting us and rambling about how superior they are, it means that Godchild was there talking through them since they are part of him. Therefore, he DID antagonise us, but played it safe when we meet him in the ending. If he controlled the Reapers but wasnt talking through them, then he could have forced Sovereing and Harbinger to speak the truth directly instead of going on about how "Independant, free of all weakness" they are, the plan of The Godchild would have been revealed in ME1 inmediatelly instead of the last hour.
- Mass Effect always contained the theme of organics vs. synthetics/created vs. creators, and other themes came up mere minutes before meeting the Catalyst (Anderson and the Illusive Man). It's ending-bashers who want people to believe that you're expected to agree with one character's opinion
Wrong. You took the wrong complain and twisted it, as expected. The complain is the "Absolutism" of The Catalyst when refering to this conflict.
"The Created WILL ALWAYS rebel against their creators"
"Without us to stop it, synthetics WILL destroy ALL organics"
Absolutism is explained futher in here at 11:39 :
The conflict is there, but never happens the way The Catalyst mentions it. The Geth only rebelled when the organics Quarians attacked FIRST. And when the Quarians left, the Geth didnt went apeshit and starter planning the doom of organics, they just went in isolation until Sovereing convinced them years later.
Even in ME3, you see in the Geth VR machine how the Geth were completely innocent on the conflict with their organic creators.
And do not forget that you CAN make peace between Quarians and Geth to the point that they fight the Reapers together. Thus proving the Godchild wrong that it doesnt ALWAYS happen. Most synthetic uprising that happened before were triggered by the organics, and were easily resolved by organics, like the Rogue VI on the Moon:
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/UNC:_Rogue_VI
And of course, the Geth conflict in ME3, the only way that they could have EVER won against their organic creators is by uploading the code of the Reapers so they become AS smart as they when they were controlled by the Reapers. Meaning that, once again, it was Reaper intervention that fucked everything thing up. If the Geth were by themselves without the upgrades, the Quarians just wipe them out without problems, and proving the Godchild wrong that the Reapers arent needed to "protect and preserve" organics because they can do just fine without them.
Godchild has to show evidence of this even ALWAYS happening, or else he is just making shit up. Kinda like how he sees the Destroy ending as not a permanent solution but somehow Synthesis IS, even when the new race of synthetised people could STILL make Synthetics as always if they find an obstacle in their lives that they cant surpass or need synthetics for.
The problem is not solved either way, and a machine that has lived for almost an eternity doesnt notice this glaring problem? or he is actually lying to us so they can survive at all cost either with Control or Synthesis??
