Did we need the Kett?

Gotta have some kind of antagonist to create some kind of conflict. If not the kett, it would have simply been a faction of the angarans that are considerably more powerful than the Roekaar. Otherwise, we'd fight nothing but robots that don't have as much depth as the geth. I guess there's also the exiles, but then that would have to play out differently somehow, sort of like us against a character like Quaritch from Avatar. 

I dunno. I actually really liked the Archon, but there had to be at least a couple of kett that spoke more than a line or two. The only ones that say anything other than him are the Cardinal and Primus. 

Lol how would that even be possible. It's basically a fight against a god. He could turn everyone in the room into amoeba if he wanted.

I'm serious what if the conflict was just based around adapting to the new galaxy/worlds. Why did we need to pew pew things in order for it to be interesting? Some of my favorite ME moments didn't even involve having to resolve a conflict w/ combat. I feel like that would have been a radical departure and good start for the AI.

The tone of the game didn't even match the main story... if it was supposed to be about exploration and the remnant that would have been pretty awesome on it's own... wtf did the Kett have to be thrown in for?  Just so we had something to CoD at?

My point is does conflict = combat?

Yes, it does. What you are suggesting sounds boring as hell. They can have that peaceful way in if you want, but only if they allow the full on combat smash their heads in option as well. You have no idea how many times I wanted to shoot sloane in the head whenever I met her.

This, Also Dragon Age and the Shepherd Trilogy essentially used the same bad guy. Plus, it gives us people to shoot at. This is Mass Effect, not No Man's Sky.

i can see it. But honestly the Kett...like most things in Andromeda...are a small part of a large puzzle.

I wouldn't really separate the two myself. Combat is pretty much part of the games' central narratives. To push the story forward, we have to kill a great many things to resolve the conflict. That we might be able to choose a non-lethal response to certain situations is basically the exception rather than the rule. 

I get this.  Sure you have to accept Shepard/Ryder have killed hundreds... but did Ryder have a good enough reason to?  He wasn't trying to preserve a galaxy at all costs... he was just new to a place that considered him a threat.

Maybe they don't give the special genetic mix for speech to the minions.

ME for me was what Nolan probably hoped Interstellar would be.