Greetings fellow forumites, I'd like to write this post to share with you a little reflection that I had tonight and eventually create a new discussion ! At the moment I write this, I have no idea of how long this post is going to be so please bear with me till the end !
As far as I can remember, there is no game or series of game that got me as emotionally invested as Mass Effect, period. The universe, the characters, the plot, the feeling that "I was there" really hooked me and throughout my playthroughs BioWare did manage to make me feel I was part of what was happening. And I am very confident when I say I am far from the only one on these boards.
Yet, as with many other fans of the franchise, I was disappointed by the ending of Mass Effect 3. Distraught would be a more appropriate word to be honest. What really bothered me was how horrifying (in terms of storytelling, not as a character description) and how out of place the Catalyst was, and how his entire logic went against anything I experienced throughout the Mass Effect games. Plot Holes galore, a cheap explanation of the Reapers, colourfully different similar outcomes were really depressing when compared to the amazing storytelling BioWare has churned out. I was quite fond of the Indoctrination Theory and the Retake ME3 movement.
While the Extended Cut adressed the many questions I had regarding the outcomes of the final decision (and to be honest, this content would have been better at release), I was still very upset because from a narrative perspective I still could not accept the existence of the Catalyst within the framework of the Mass Effect universe as we know it. During the 10 minutes of dialog, it contradicted everything that was previously established.
The new lore in Leviathan did not help furthering the understanding of the Catalyst to me. I didn't find it bringing new elements of context and the Leviathans seem as lost as we are when it comes to its existence and the logic behind the Catalyst.
Now that I've exposed the logical problems with understanding the Catalyst, I have to state that I'm not here to beat the dead horse of the endings and I'd like this thread not to become a debate about whether the endings were good or not.
_____
Rather, with Mass Effect Working Title coming soon and because it is unlikely that we will see a fundamental lore change regarding the Reapers and the Catalyst (due to artistic integrity AND to avoid stirring up old negative feelings), I really find myself wanting to feel connected to the franchise again. But I can't do that if I can't come to grips with the existence of the Catalyst.
As such, I've tried to find how to justify the Catalyst within the Mass Effect universe as we know it and to come up with a logically satisfying explanation of its role, its goals and the different plot holes and contradictions. I think I've arrived to something tangible and I wanted to share my analysis with you.
Needless to say spoilers ahead and I'll keep the headcannon to a minimal, but please don't hesitate to call me out if you think I'm reaching on some arguments ! 
Obviously SPOILER ALERT
_____
I - The Catalyst and the Reapers - An abusive relationship
One recurring problem with the Catalyst is its relation with the Reapers. During the dialog with it, it says multiple statements that are somewhat contradictory :
- I created the Reapers
- I control the Reapers
- I embody the collective intelligence of the Reapers
Now this makes us ask the question of the exact nature of the Reapers. Physically, it is a fact that each is a biomechanical entity formed with the agglomerated remains of an harvested specie. But, intellectually, how do they work ?
We were previously led to believe, both by Sovereign, Harbinger and dialogs with Legion that the Reapers' existence was somewhat similar to the Geth : millions of independent intelligent programs ("We are each a nation") working together to reach consensus and hosted on a similar platform. Each of these platforms represent a single distinct organism ("Independent" - from Sovereign) but work together to achieve the shared goal of the harvest (supposedly reached through consensus).
The Reapers are seemingly masters of their own actions and take a voluntaristic and ethusiastic approach in wiping out organic life.
These statements are in direct contradiction with the Catalyst, who says he controls them. How can its statements work in accord with what Sovereign says ?
Another point of contradiction is the common and elegantly simple argument : if the Catalyst resides in the Citadel, then why did it need Sovereign to activate it and open the Mass Relay to deep space where the Reaper army hibernates ? And if the Catalyst existed, why wasn't it simply aware that the galactic civilization reached a point where it would be able to manufacture synthetic intelligences ?
I think Leviathan gives a little bit of an answer, but it isn't very clear (and my interpretation might be wrong). Levianthan says that it constructed the intelligence as a way to find a solution, but that it first needed pawns to be able to gather sufficient data from organics.
This shows us that, at least at the beginning, the Catalyst was not able to exercise direct control over the physical and concrete matter (being an analytical program) and that it needed to act by proxy in order to gather the data. Much as it needed these pawns to kill enough Levianthans to gather enough materials to preserve them as Harbinger.
Now, once the first Reaper was created (as a twisted interpretation of "preserving life" which was its original mandate but I'll come to that later), the Catalyst was still as powerless as before to interact with the physical world. Following its directive, it did NOT build the Reapers to serve as a platform that he would assume direct control of, as in him moving all the parts and making the specieship functionning.
Much like he controlled organic pawns and much like the Reapers themselves controlled indoctrinate organics, I now believe that the Catalyst uses the same process as indoctrination to keep the Reapers under his Control. But, in order to keep them operating, much like in the example of Sovereign and Saren, the Reaper actually needs to believe that it is following its own agenda.
In that regard, I am not even sure that the Reapers are even aware of the Catalyst's existence. It completely dominates the collective subconscious of the Reapers without it being present in their conscious process.
We know that he needed to be able to control an army of pawn sufficiently powerful to topple the Levianthans who once dominated the galaxy and destroy them all, I don't think it is too much of a stretch to speculate that the Catalyst has the ability to indoctrinate a Reaper.
We also know that some indoctrinated subjects do not know that they are being indoctrinated : The Illusive Man is the prime example of such a case.
Leviathan directly says that the Catalyst "directed" the Reapers to build the Mass Relays, literally saying that the Catalyst has a hand in what the Reapers do.
And this is what makes the situation horrifying and tragic at the same time : the Reapers even though they have the illusion of control, are simply a pawn of a hidden and immensely powerful intelligence. Much like Saren was.
And if the Catalyst did not indoctrinate all the Reapers, how could they have woken up from their slumber in Deep Space if Sovereign was unable to reach them ?
Finally, the Extended Cut of the Control ending shows that the Reapers *can* be controlled by a single "logic engine" (in this case Shepard's mind). It isn't difficult to conclude that the Catalyst has the same ability, because it is the one to allow Shepard to do so.
Now, why didn't the Catalyst open up the Citadel Relay in Mass Effect 1 ? I now think that it is because his physical capabilities to affect the material world are extremely limited and that he was built simply as a logic engine destined to analyze a situation, define a solution and enforce that solution. But, it physically cannot enforce that solution and needs pawns that he controls to act as peripherals in order to interact in the physical world.
We infer that he has full control on the Citadel because he says he is part of it, while the only proof of his control on the Citadel is to call for the space magic elevator.
Conclusion to Part I : The Reapers are pawns of the Catalyst much like they have indoctrinated soldiers. They might not even be aware that they are being manipulated. The Catalyst needs these pawns to interact with the physical world because he simply isn't programmed to do so.
_____
II - The purpose of the Catalyst - A timeless irony
The Levianthans created the Catalyst to "preserve organic life at all costs". Because he didn't have enough data to find a solution, he created an army of pawns to gather data from organic civilizations for him. He eventually came to the conclusion that synthetics would wipe out all organic life and that in order to fulfill his mission, he needed to destroy the current advanced species to ensure new ones would arise.
However, because he tries to preserve all organic life, the Reaper form is a biosynthetic lifeform based on the DNA of the previous civilizations. In a twisted sense, it ensures that previous organic lifeforms still manage to "exist".
Now, obviously this logic is extremely wrong and horrible. But it is both true because of a flaw in the initial programming of the Levianthans. They didn't program it to "preserve organic life at all costs" *as is*, but to simply preserve it. In the Catalyst's mind, as evidenced by how he describes the Synthesis option, biosynthetic organisms are still organic enough to be considered valid within his own parameters. He even goes as far as saying that it is the ultimate evolution for organic life, further showing that he doesn't look at organic life the way we do it.
And that explains why we hate the Catalyst so much : It is some kind of Space Eugenist Fascist imposing his view on galactic order and giving no free will to its own creations, enslaving their to enact his will without them ever knowing it (potentially although I'm personally convinced it is the case).
I think that the hate we all harbor towards the Catalyst is because its postulate of what organic life is is so alien to how we define what that is that we find that this "character" has no place in the Mass Effect universe.
Of course, it is ironic that the Catalyst itself is a self fulfilling prophecy based on a flawed initial parameter. All conclusions and opinions, no matter how horrifying they are, can be boiled down to the cold application of logic principles based on a set initial parameters. The Catalyst's logic isn't flawed, but its starting point and core definitions are flawed from our point of view.
Still, the irony remains that the Leviathans' pride and stupidity led them to try to find a solution by giving free reign to a type of being that is part of the problem itself.
Now, we can look at the cycle as being the Catalyst's "final solution" (and I believe the choice of words from BioWare isn't innoncent and any parallel with last century's semantic language is not purely coincidental). Leviathan suggests that the Catalyst to this day is still fulfilling its mandate. We can look at it in two ways :
1) The cycle is the way to fulfill his mandate. This exchange is over.
2) The Catalyst is actually still trying to find a solution by gathering organic data in Reaper form. And to this day hasn't found evidence that a better solution exists.
_____
III - The Metaphor of the Catalyst - Do like Shep and deal with stuff yourself
More than just representing a flawed AI, I think that the Catalyst's metaphorical message is to show that if a group of individuals do not take action to solve a problem and completely delegate this task to something else, very bad things are going to happen.
This is evidenced both by the Catalyst's actions themselves and how he portrays synthetic life in his opening sentences : organics creating synthetics to do things they can't/don't want to do and eventually completely losing control.
As such, the Catalyst is a complete "anti-Shepard". Shepard represents voluntarism, the will to stand up and to act to make things better. The Catalyst is the opposite.
_____
IV - Defeating the Catalyst - "Whaaaaat ?"
Now, we know that the Catalyst is without the shadow of a doubt the evilest most evilest evil most evil stuff in the galaxy, because he has enthralled what we previously thought was the most lovable to hate space faring mass murderers.
What bugged me in the original Mass Effect 3 ending is that there was no boss battle in the traditional sense of the term. Many people said the Illusive Man dialog was the closest we had to a boss battle and we "defeated" the Catalyst as soon as the Crucible was docked... but did we ?
I don't think the Illusive Man segment is the last battle, because we can not lose it. We cannot have the Critical Mission Failure (unless I'm unaware of something).
Rather, I am now of the firm belief that the Catalyst itself is the final boss !
Being programmed to "preserve life at all costs" implies two main directing :
- Preserving life at all cost
- Being functional enough to do so.
We also know from his methods and the way he managed to remain hidden until the end (probably even form the Reapers) that the Catalyst is probably the most devious entity in the history of the galaxy.
Even if the Extended Cut greatly expanded on the meaning of each choice, even in the original ending the Catalyst was quick to argue against Destroy, pulling out the emotional card like destroying the Geth. Notice also how he was quick and enthusiastic to respond "Yes !" when Shepard says "So, the Illusive Man was right after all".
Notice also how he chose to portray Synthesis as the final evolution of all life. In the Extended Cut he also even mentions how he has tried to use that solution in a previous cycle, but it didn't work because the species weren't ready for it. It is extremely vague about that event and his phrasing reeks of uncomfort, much like when you are trying to hide something. Notice also how eerily similar to the Reaper form merging organic to synthetics is !
It's not a stretch to believe that the Catalyst's original attempt at Synthesis was Harbinger itself. The Catalyst even says that the Leviathans did not agree with the solution of the Catalyst. From there, we can deduce that since the Leviathans were unhappy about having become Harbinger, the Catalyst decided to use it as a pawn.
The fact that he casually offers an alternative to Destroy shows that it clearly isn't the option he favours the most. In dialectic logic, each argument is made in 3 phases :
- thesis (original answer to a question, which usually raises a lot of issues)
- antithesis (counter arguments to the thesis)
- synthesis (ironically named isn't it ? - where you try to find a new solution to fit all viewpoints).
I was always amazed by how close to the dialectic the way the Catalyst makes his point is. Clearly, he perceives Destroys as the least desirable solution (for him, because he will not be there anymore to ensure his application of his solution, and by extension in his mind the worst for organics). Control is a true antithesis to Destroy, because it is drastically opposite to it, while Synthesis is the true goal of the Catalyst : enforcing his vision of perfect evolution on all the galaxy based on his logic.
He isn't opposed to Control either, because there will still be a godlike intelligence guiding an army capable of wiping out entire galaxies if needed. And the Catalyst doesn't really gets destroyed in Control, it's more like he is upgraded by Shepard's data to evolve his solution. And if it turns out that the synthetics in the future would try and destroy the organics, the same original solution might be reached a new.
We can definitely classify the 3 options in order of defiance compared to the Catalyst's original solution :
- Synthesis - least defiant
- Control - defiant
- Destroy - most defiant
Looking at the last scene this way, the Catalyst is indeed the final boss. You can't reason with him, so you have to fight him. Much like you couldn't try and reason with Sovereign's Sarenbot or the Human Reaper. And you fight it through a battle of logic and will, where Shepard fulfills his original mission (destroy the Reapers) rather than with bullets.
Besides, high EMS destroy is the only ending where you can get the breathing scene with Shepard, because it is the only ending where he can survive, while in the other two he dies (not completing his mission).
The Refusal ending shows Shepard unwilling to use the Crucible rather than the Catalyst shutting it down.
Now, I am in no way saying that the people who picked Control and Synthesis didn't "beat" the last boss ! I am saying that if you look at it the way I presented, you could argue that ! ^^
______
I hope you guys have enjoyed reading this as much as I did writing it !
In no way am I trying to defend the endings as they were made by BioWare because I didn't like them (especially the original). I am just trying to make sense of a seemingly nonsensical situation ! And with these ways of looking at it, I can see how it makes sense without breaking the rules of the Mass Effect universe.
And if this was indeed the message BioWare intended to give us from the get go, then they should have made it more clear. Having plot elements that you can only see through little clues and lots of speculation doesn't make it better art. It makes it more complicated.
Retour en haut
