To answer your question, its because it's not my job to head canon and invent ways to make sense out of the nonsense. It's the author's job to write a story that makes sense on its own.
*giggles*
There isn't a game in the franchise, nope, not even ME1, that doesn't require headcaon to invent ways to make sense of the nonsense.
not true. It was created by the Leviathan, and that's all we know.
Oops. Thanks, that sentence got cut off. It was supposed to say "The Catalyst created and installed itself into the Citadel." I edited the original post and rephrased it to be more clear.
if don't see the difference between the IA navigator of the normandy controlling the normandy and a software created to analyze a problem controlling a space station, I don't know what to say.
compatibility is not something you can always force.
And yet somehow the Navigator was able to control a body she hadn't been designed for and hadn't designed. Now the fact that EDI can do this doesn't automatically mean any or every AI can, but the Catalyst claims to be even more advanced and designed the Citadel and the Cycle.
It's not headcanon.
it's in-game information that the catalyst cannot control all the citadel functionalities. He need Saren, he need Shepard, he use the keepers etc.
imho you want the story to be badly written, so you pick the scenario that makes lesser sense, even if thare is another, perfectly plausibile, available scenario,
No, it isn't. Where is that stated? We don't even technically know if the Catalyst was "awake" during ME1. Now, it is a sensible inference that he can't, but it is not logical that this would be the case from the beginning. This is exactly the problem and danger with Retcons. What is now the most likely scenario is a very stupid starting point. The fact that this is what makes the most sense is why the story is badly written. I don't want the story to be badly written, it just was. You're trying to salvage it.
between two (or more) possible/plausible hypothesis, I prefer to pick not the most reasonable/likely, but the one that fits better with all the other info that I have.
this way, my interpretation is perfectly self-consistent and uncontradicted by in-game information.
Does the game inform you that the Catalyst has full control over the Citadel? No. On the other hand, it's implied that the catalyst has limitations.
So, if the limited control scenario creates no plot holes, why sholudn't you accept it?
just to prove that ME3 is badly written?
Possible does not equal plausible. There is nothing plausible about the Catalyst not having control over the most important function of the Citadel to its objective and purpose from the beginning looking forward.
I just realized what the problem is. You're arguing that the Catalyst doesn't have Control as if I'm saying it does. The only thing to suggest it does is that Shepard-Catalyst seems to control the arms in the EC cutscene for Control. What I am saying is that it should have control of the Relay function and it's stupid if/that it does not. There is no good reason for it not to.
*giggles*
There isn't a game in the franchise, nope, not even ME1, that doesn't require headcaon to invent ways to make sense of the nonsense.
Yeah, to some extent, but it depends on what and how it's presented. It depends on how much the story hinges on that thing and it depends on how logical (or not) the assumption is. The particular issue we are discussing is not something that can be glossed over. The Catalyst calls into question the entire plot of the first game.
It's not headcanon.
it's in-game information that the catalyst cannot control all the citadel functionalities. He need Saren, he need Shepard, he use the keepers etc.
imho you want the story to be badly written, so you pick the scenario that makes lesser sense, even if thare is another, perfectly plausibile, available scenario,
And yet somehow the Navigator was able to control a body she hadn't been designed for and hadn't designed. Now the fact that EDI can do this doesn't automatically mean any or every AI can, but the Catalyst claims to be even more advanced and designed the Citadel and the Cycle.
An IA designed to do mechanical tasks (running and controlling a ship) is able to control - mechanically - a body.
An IA desigend to analize variables and solve abstract problems is unable to fully control a space station.
Two different levels.
No, it isn't. Where is that stated? We don't even technically know if the Catalyst was "awake" during ME1. Now, it is a sensible inference that he can't, but it is not logical that this would be the case from the beginning. This is exactly the problem and danger with Retcons. What is now the most likely scenario is a very stupid starting point. The fact that this is what makes the most sense is why the story is badly written. I don't want the story to be badly written, it just was. You're trying to salvage it.
two different levels, two different problems.
Is the catalyst a retcon? yes, no doubt.
is Me3 (especially the ending) badly written? yes, it's horribly written, absolute trash, and I was one of the angry fan who was asking, right on this forum, closure and clarification.
but, but... is the Me saga, after the EC, bugged without hope? Is there no chance to explain all the events without falling into a plot holes? Well, no.
You just need only to accept a few, plausible scenarios (like the catalyst being unable to fully control the citadel), and everything makes sense.
There could have been better scenarios? More reasonable scenarios? Yes, yes, of course, but the scenario that allow us to avoid huge plot holes is still a possible one, or at least uncontradicted by in-game-information.
Possible does not equal plausible. There is nothing plausible about the Catalyst not having control over the most important function of the Citadel to its objective and purpose from the beginning looking forward.
I just realized what the problem is. You're arguing that the Catalyst doesn't have Control as if I'm saying it does. The only thing to suggest it does is that Shepard-Catalyst seems to control the arms in the EC cutscene for Control. What I am saying is that it should have control of the Relay function and it's stupid if/that it does not. There is no good reason for it not to.
It is plausible, it's like a chess software not being able to control the security system of a building. Their purpose it's totally different. They are created to perform different taks.
EDI is not the catalyst.
The Sheparlyst is not the catalyst.
It's not in-game information. There's nothing to indicate that the Catalyst exists in ME1, or why would Saren need the Conduit? Saren does everything from the control panel that Garrus has never heard of. And when you do meet the Catalyst, who says he is the Citadel, you can't ask him why he was asleep when Sovereign was trying to start the harvest. And he doesn't offer an explanation for why Saren was needed.
The players are just expected to assume something because there's no explanation for it otherwise.
the explanation is so simple: the catalyst can't control the Citadel.
he needed Saren to take manual control of the Citadel, he needed TIM to take control of the Citadel, he needed Shepard to makes the crucible works etc.
he's an incorporeal IA desigend to analize variables, not to control panels and mechanical things.
he created keepers, reapers, indoctrinated people etc to do all the "handwork"
I don't understand why it's so hard to accept 
imho you all unconsciously believe that the catalyst is a sort of almighty GOD, and he should be able to do everything... is a super advanced chess software, nothing more.
An IA designed to do mechanical tasks (running and controlling a ship) is able to control - mechanically - a body.
An IA desigend to analize variables and solve abstract problems is unable to fully control a space station.
Two different levels.
Translation: "Only the distinctions I need to make my point matter. Walking is the same thing as flying a space ship apparently. There's no way an AI designed to analyze variables could figure out how to turn on a relay even though it can command Reapers."
two different levels, two different problems.
Is the catalyst a retcon? yes, no doubt.
is Me3 (especially the ending) badly written? yes, it's horribly written, absolute trash, and I was one of the angry fan who was asking, right on this forum, closure and clarification.
but, but... is the Me saga, after the EC, bugged without hope? Is there no chance to explain all the events without falling into a plot holes? Well, no.
You just need only to accept a few, plausible scenarios (like the catalyst being unable to fully control the citadel), and everything makes sense.
There could have been better scenarios? More reasonable scenarios? Yes, yes, of course, but the scenario that allow us to avoid huge plot holes is still a possible one, or at least uncontradicted by in-game-information.
You are accepting something stupid and nonsensical to fix something else stupid and nonsensical. It's head canon, like I said. If that helps you feel good about the series, more power to you.
It is plausible, it's like a chess software not being able to control the security system of a building. Their purpose it's totally different. They are created to perform different taks.
EDI is not the catalyst.
The Sheparlyst is not the catalyst.
And the Catalyst is not a piece of chess software or an OS. It is, according to itself, more than an AI. In fairness, I have always said it's only a very limited VI, but the game doesn't allow you to explore that.
he's an incorporeal IA desigend to analize variables, not to control panels and mechanical things.
he created keepers, reapers, indoctrinated people etc to do all the "handwork"
How did he make the Reapers? How did he make the pawns that killed the Leviathans?
imho you all unconsciously believe that the catalyst is a sort of almighty GOD, and he should be able to do everything... is a super advanced chess software, nothing more.
This strawman crap is annoying
Us: The Catalyst should be able to turn on the Relay.
You: I don't know why you think it's God.
. There's no way an AI designed to analyze variables could figure out how to turn on a relay even though it can command Reapers."
of course he could figure out how to turn on a relay.
simply, everything in the games implies that he cannot do it personally.
so you're telling me that there's no way (NO WAY! IMPOSSIBLE!) that an AI designed to analyze variables is unable to fully control a space station/mass relay?
You are accepting something stupid and nonsensical to fix something else stupid and nonsensical. It's head canon, like I said. If that helps you feel good about the series, more power to you.
show me where and when, in the game, someone/something inform us that the catalyst has full control over the citadel, and than my interpretation will be head canon.
Until then, it will be simply a rational deduction
And the Catalyst is not a piece of chess software or an OS. It is, according to itself, more than an AI. In fairness, I have always said it's only a very limited VI, but the game doesn't allow you to explore that.
and you cannot accept that "something more than a IA" is unable to fully e directly control a space station? You have so much experience is "incorporeal advanced AI" that you are 100% positive to exclude that possibility?
How did he make the Reapers? How did he make the pawns that killed the Leviathans?
by deceiving them, of course.
it's plausible that the leviathans gave the catalyst a large amount of resources and handwork (the pawns) to study and solve the synth-organic conflict. He used this resources against his employers.
Us: The Catalyst should be able to turn on the Relay.
You: I don't know why you think it's God.
You: the catalyst should NECESSARELY be able to turn on the relay, even if we see that he constatly need external help to perform material actions.
ME: Why?
YOU: Because it would have been easier for him.
nonsense, man. Nonsense.
bad writing =/= plot holes
the explanation is so simple: the catalyst can't control the Citadel.
he needed Saren to take manual control of the Citadel, he needed TIM to take control of the Citadel, he needed Shepard to makes the crucible works etc.
he's an incorporeal IA desigend to analize variables, not to control panels and mechanical things.
he created keepers, reapers, indoctrinated people etc to do all the "handwork"
I don't understand why it's so hard to accept
imho you all unconsciously believe that the catalyst is a sort of almighty GOD, and he should be able to do everything... is a super advanced chess software, nothing more.
of course he could figure out how to turn on a relay.
simply, everything in the games implies that he cannot do it personally.
No, only that it didn't do it implies that it can't.
so you're telling me that there's no way (NO WAY! IMPOSSIBLE!) that an AI designed to analyze variables is unable to fully control a space station/mass relay?
Ok, you're either trolling or have a serious reading comprehension problem that I don't want to make a mockery of. I'm not interested in exploring every possibility. I am interested in what is reasonable and sensible. I also would love to know how thinking the Catalyst should have control of the single most important function becomes thinking it should have full control, though full control isn't unreasonable. Unless, of course, the relay and arm functions are completely mechanical in nature with no electronic components, like our "Keepers with pulleys" joke.
I don't care if the Catalyst doesn't have Control of the water or air recycling. I don't care if it can't control the Presidium lighting or the elevators. I do care that it can't control the thing it needs most.
by deceiving them, of course.
it's plausible that the leviathans gave the catalyst a large amount of resources and handwork (the pawns) to study and solve the synth-organic conflict. He used this resources against his employers.
But how did he get them to do anything? He can't make things move or shoot according to you. That's mechanical. He can only analyze things.
You: the catalyst should NECESSARELY be able to turn on the relay, even if we see that he constatly need external help to perform material actions.
ME: Why?
YOU: Because it would have been easier for him.
nonsense, man. Nonsense.
bad writing =/= plot holes
This is you failing to understand what a retcon is. When "he constantly needed external help to perform material actions," he didn't even exist. And again, I'm agreeing with you that it seems the Catalyst does not have control over those functions. What you can't seem to grasp is that is a stupid premise.
And your last line is exactly right, but you're using he former to avoid the latter.
If he says he's the Citadel then why can't he control it?
do you control your heart, your blood, your stomach?
does an OS control every mechanical part of the PC?
why should the catalyst have absolute, full control over every single part of the citadel, and any other scenario rejected a priori?
Because the writers hadn't created the Catalyst in ME1, so therefore didn't make allowances for why Saran was necessary, and when they did create him they're the ones who decided that he was the Citadel, which doesn't make any sense.
but if you accept the hypotesis (unconfirmed but also uncontradicted) that the catalyst might not have complete mechanical control over the citadel, and so he need Saren, the keepers, Shepard etc, it makes sense.
It badly written, but it makes sense.
But how did he get them to do anything? He can't make things move or shoot according to you. That's mechanical. He can only analyze things.
Simply by telling them to do that.
If you are the super-brain in charge of a galactic project, it shouldn't be so difficoult.
No, only that it didn't do it implies that it can't.
the fact that he didn't do it when he should have done it leaves open the possibility that he couldn't do it.
I'm not interested in exploring every possibility.
It's very simple: you can accept to assume as possible the existence of an incorporeal AI, created to analize variables, unable to activate a relay, or you can't accept it.
in the first case, there is the possibility that ME1 makes sense. In the other case, Me1 can't possibly make sense.
do you control your heart, your blood, your stomach?
does an OS control every mechanical part of the PC?
why should the catalyst have absolute, full control over every single part of the citadel, and any other scenario rejected a priori?
do you control your heart, your blood, your stomach?
does an OS control every mechanical part of the PC?
why should the catalyst have absolute, full control over every single part of the citadel, and any other scenario rejected a priori?
My brain controls those things. But I do control my motor functions, which is what the arms would be analogous to. I also didn't build or design my body or get choice over what I can and can't control. The Catalyst did though. So why did it make itself unable to control the Relay function or the arms? Don't give me your crap about total control. Focus on those two functions and those two functions only.
Simply by telling them to do that.
If you are the super-brain in charge of a galactic project, it shouldn't be so difficoult.
So why can't it tell the Relay to open or the arms to move? It's still the super brain isn't it?
the fact that he didn't do it when he should have done it leaves open the possibility that he couldn't do it.
He didn't exist when he should have done it. Why would he make himself unable to do it?
It's very simple: you can accept to assume as possible the existence of an incorporeal AI, created to analize variables, unable to activate a relay, or you can't accept it.
in the first case, there is the possibility that ME1 makes sense. In the other case, Me1 can't possibly make sense.
I reject it because there is no reason for such a thing when that AI is in control of the entire set up. If it was just a part of a larger system that took over, that would make more sense. There's a great point and click game called Primordia that has something like that. (Seriously, you should play this game if you like dystopian, post-apocalyptic, or robot games.)
What you're doing is seeing a plothole in ME1, taking a lump of clay called "the Catalyst" and shaping it to fit the hole. That's totally fine but be honest about what you're doing. For you, everything is fixed, but someone like me will always see the lines and how the patch doesn't really fit with the rest of the surrounding material.
the explanation is so simple: the catalyst can't control the Citadel.
So who or what raised the platform that Shepard passed out on? Who or what raised the ramps for control and destroy?
Oh boy, what is this argument about? Kal, you said you agree that the Catalyst is a retcon. Then what is the point in making everyone believe your headcanon? Yes, headcanon. Catalyst was absent in ME1 so you make up your own details to make sense of it. And this is where the argument ends. It doesn't matter if it can do something or not if it didn't even exist in ME1. You keep asking for proof that the Catalyst can control the Citadel when in fact you can't prove otherwise.
It is very simple: the Catalyst designed the Citadel, the Reapers and the relay network. As far as we can determine from the facts given us in the game, the Citadel comes as close to being its body as anything can. It also says it represents the collective intelligence of the Reapers.
The idea that it can't control the Citadel is plainly ludicrous. If you're looking for an in-world reason why it didn't do anything in ME1, look elsewhere. Doesn't matter though. The writer clearly didn't care enough to write even a single line about this. Maybe they also wasted their word budget on irrelevant stuff like Conrad Verner's actions on the Citadel and didn't have anything left for the main plot, we don't know. In any case, it's a retcon where we have to invent headcanon in order to make sense of it, which isn't exactly excellent story design for something as important as the main antagonist.
I mean, kinda. My brain does anyway. If I'm brain dead there's a good chance major organs won't work. But that said, I do have control over motor functions. I can walk and pick things up with my hands and speak with my mouth.
If your analogy is that the Catalyst is the brains of the operation and that's it, then he's really bad at it.
So why can't it tell the Relay to open or the arms to move? It's still the super brain isn't it?
???
the point is that there are functionalities of your body that you're unable to fully and directly control.
you cannot decide "now it would be a good time to start my digestion". You need "external" imput, and stimulation from different components of your organism. You need a complex network that you cannot control "at will".
the concept of an intelligent entity not being able to fully e directly control its "home", whenever it want and in any situation, is perfectly sound.
So why did it make itself unable to control the Relay function or the arms? Don't give me your crap about total control. Focus on those two functions and those two functions only.
the Leviathans made it unable to do that. Why shouldn't they? They need him to analize variables and solve a conflict, not to control a space station.
I don't doubt that the catalyst would have liked to have full control over everything, but not every inherent, original limitation can be overcome. Unless he is a sort of almighy IA God, which is not.
btw, he used to have indirect control over those two functions, through the sovereing and the keepers, until the protheans changed the signal.
So who or what raised the platform that Shepard passed out on? Who or what raised the ramps for control and destroy?
controlling platforms is very different than controlling a mass relay...
Oh boy, what is this argument about? Kal, you said you agree that the Catalyst is a retcon. Then what is the point in making everyone believe your headcanon? Yes, headcanon. Catalyst was absent in ME1 so you make up your own details to make sense of it. And this is where the argument ends. It doesn't matter if it can do something or not if it didn't even exist in ME1. You keep asking for proof that the Catalyst can control the Citadel when in fact you can't prove otherwise.
no, it's not head-canon.
it's taking implicit and explicit information and putting them together so that Me1 becomes compatible with Me3 ending.
No additions, no inventions.
Just picking the most (or one of the most) consistent scenario, among the many possible interpretation (none of them head-canon. For example, the scenario of the crucible hacking the catalyst is also perfectly sound and not headcanon)
you may found unreasonable/unlikely that the catalyst cannot direclty and fully control the arms and the relay of the citadel, with a mere snap of his fingers, but that's what emerges from his action and his omissions.
he need handwork, pawns, to do everything.
f you need to solve a big problem, and so you decide to create the most advanced and intelligent (and thus, dangerous) IA in the universe, would you create it with the ability to take control of things and technology or would you try at least to create him the most incorporeal and "harmless" you can, with inherent limitations and inability to upgrade itself?
f you need to solve a big problem, and so you decide to create the most advanced and intelligent (and thus, dangerous) IA in the universe, would you create it with the ability to take control of things and technology or would you try at least to create him the most incorporeal and "harmless" you can, with inherent limitations and inability to upgrade itself?
And yet the Catalyst successfully murdered a majority of Leviathans and turned them into Harbinger. Apparently they allowed it to happen on purpose, right?
I think the discussion about computers is a non-issue, as well. Operating system, drivers, and other software in fact do control the hardware. For example, software can tell your computer to open its CD/DVD Rom. (Go to Computer > right-click the disc unit > click Open. See what happens.) If you have a laptop with switchable graphics like I do (BTW, don't buy that stuff for gaming. Worst decision I've ever made.), then you can tell your computer through software to stop using the weaker card and switch to the more powerful one which makes that particular card run physically, the fan starts spinning and everything. You can overclock your computer, make its hardware parts work more effectively, by using software. Computer without software is just a collection of parts that do nothing. Its functions are controlled by OS and other software since the moment you push the start button. Delete an important system file and you're screwed, you may not be able to get the machine perform very basic functions. I remember when Windows Update killed off most of my USB ports and my webcam, lol, which was fixed by the following Update.
But anyway. I still think it's good that Kal has come up with some explanation. I mean, whatever makes it work for anyone is good news, come on. But I don't think it can be used as the official reason why the Catalyst has no control over the Citadel. Not only did it built the Citadel so there's no reason for it not to accommodate all its needs, especially given that its task is kinda important (or that's what it claims anyway), but it resides right inside of it. An AI that should be advanced beyond everything we know. It'd be shooting itself in the foot for no apparent good reason. It's as if I built a house with everything I needed and then locked myself outside forever.
And yet the Catalyst successfully murdered a majority of Leviathans and turned them into Harbinger. Apparently they allowed it to happen on purpose, right?
they were deceived. Deception is a risk you need to take, with a super-intelligent IA.
IA misinterpreting order and revolting against it's creator is something very common, in SCI-Fi.
But this kind of AI doesn't necessarly need to be able to directly control every piece of technology in the universe, imho.
they were deceived. Deception is a risk you need to take, with a super-intelligent IA.
IA misinterpreting order and revolting against it's creator is something very common, in SCI-Fi.
But this kind of AI doesn't necessarly need to be able to directly control every piece of technology in the universe, imho.
And deception was part of this programming?
think the discussion about computers is a non-issue, as well. Operating system, drivers, and other software in fact do control the hardware. For example, software can tell your computer to open its CD/DVD Rom. (Go to Computer > right-click the disc unit > click Open. See what happens.) If you have a laptop with switchable graphics like I do (BTW, don't buy that stuff for gaming. Worst decision I've ever made.), then you can tell your computer through software to stop using the weaker card and switch to the more powerful one which makes that particular card run physically, the fan starts spinning and everything. You can overclock your computer, make its hardware parts work more effectively, by using software. Computer without software is just a collection of parts that do nothing. Its functions are controlled by OS and other software since the moment you push the start button. Delete an important system file and you're screwed, you may not be able to get the machine perform very basic functions. I remember when Windows Update killed off most of my USB ports and my webcam, lol, which was fixed by the following Update.
but the software need "mechanical/electircal components" to run the hardware. Circuits, cables, etc. An OS has not a direct and full control over the hardware.
if you messed up with these components, change codes etc, the software may not be able to interact correctly with the hardware.
It is very simple: the Catalyst designed the Citadel, the Reapers and the relay network. As far as we can determine from the facts given us in the game, the Citadel comes as close to being its body as anything can. It also says it represents the collective intelligence of the Reapers.
The idea that it can't control the Citadel is plainly ludicrous. If you're looking for an in-world reason why it didn't do anything in ME1, look elsewhere. Doesn't matter though. The writer clearly didn't care enough to write even a single line about this. Maybe they also wasted their word budget on irrelevant stuff like Conrad Verner's actions on the Citadel and didn't have anything left for the main plot, we don't know. In any case, it's a retcon where we have to invent headcanon in order to make sense of it, which isn't exactly excellent story design for something as important as the main antagonist.
Hey, hey, hey, don't touch our number one fan! He's one of the few things written consistently throughout the franchise.
Retour en haut