Did we need the Kett?

When you have access to an entire galaxy, I think you need an antagonist who is capable of impacting you almost anywhere.  Otherwise, they're not a very dangerous or intimidating foe.  Most video games I can think of are based on enemies that envelop your surroundings and, in some cases, your very way of life.  The idea of planet specific enemies is interesting as a side story line, but it can't be an anchor.  I don't think a majority of players would have been interested in something like that and I'd be one of them.

One problem, in my opinion, is that almost any enemy is going to pale in comparison to the Reapers.  And, if you compare the kett/Reapers, you can see a lot of similarities.  Most notably - the Reapers harvested species to turn them into more Reapers.  The kett harvest species to turn them into more kett and improve their species.  There's quite a bit of crossover.

It's a difficult problem to overcome and I'm not sure there was any easy solution that would've made for a compelling story.

I dunno... it certainly would have been a radical departure from the OT.  Would MEA have been for everybody if they took out a galaxy wide threat?  Maybe not.  I found the scourge way more menacing after a while than I did the Kett.  The Kett had my interest in their very first cinematic... but a lot like what happened with the reapers once they lost their cthulhu appeal I feel they became sorta lame.

Ok, first of all:

This is probably the best Q scene ever.

Second, I like the kett as an antagonist race. I think they strike a good ballance.
- They are evil enough that we can fight them without much remorse (I've heard them described as the biological equivalent to the borg, to stick with the Star Trek metaphor).
- They still have quite a bit of mystique about them and from what we know so far, we've only seen a tiny sub-fraction of their race.
- Despite their evilness, they are able and willing to interact with us, unlike the reapers who were just so aloof that they didn't consider us more than ants to stomp on. This gives them the potential for interesting stories, which can go beyond fight for survival".
- While powerful as a race, they are not invincible, again, as the reapers were. A war against the kett will not necessarily rely on a deus ex machina like the crucible to win it.
- They seem to have internal conflicts going on, which could be explored and exploited further in the future and which already make them interesting

So yea, I think the kett were pretty well designed and handled in the game and they definitely have a great deal of potential for possible sequels, definitely more than the reapers ever had. Don't get me wrong, I loved Sovereign and his speech but one has to admit that the BW writers did write themselves into a bit of a corner with them. The kett seem to be more sustainable as villains (or even in more complex roles) in Andromeda.

True, but the one thing that ties the Geth, Rachni and all the other early elements together is Saren and his "ship" Sovereign, no?  He's essentially the foundation upon which everything else is built before we realize Sovereign is the true threat.

That was kind of my point.  The idea (as I interpreted it) was planet specific enemies and I think you ultimately need to have one major antagonist tying all of those elements together, and in a game that is based upon galaxy-wide travel, it's hard to make that enemy anything else but a galaxy-wide threat.

Where did I mention Halo? I like it the way it is. It seems like people like you and OP should be playing Batman a Tell Tale Series

I can see it now. Ryder having a final boss battle with Pureheart the Insufferable Sonofabitch. 

They definitely tried that approach in the first game... I'm such a throwback I remember randomly picking out the first ME at a blockbuster video!  I took from the marketing on the cover that they were going for a Star Trek vibe.  I certainly didn't grab it because it looked like it was going to be some action packed shooter.   Maybe we're in the minority now... I'm not so sure though.

That "something" is the plot, which doesn't need to include a single, omnipresent, larger-than-life villain to function perfectly. In fact, I don't really see the kett tying it all together in this case. If anything, they diminish the whole pathfinding and new galaxy discovery, which felt to me like a totally unrelated sidequest, even if it's technically your job and priority.

If I were to include them anyway, I'd have probably done it later in the story, once you're stablished in Andromeda. So maybe focus mostly on getting to know and settling in Andromeda in the first game (preferably making it more interesting than those damn vaults), and expand on the whole evil overlord menace in the sequels, once you have an actual home to defend.

I wish the Kett had stuck to their Angara tactics with the Milky Way races.
With the Angara they acted all friendly at first, making promises, giving gifts. With "us" they don't even bother to talk, just start shooting.

It would have been more fun when we first arrived at the Nexus to find them all buddy buddy with the Kett. Maybe even let us fight some Angara on their behalf.
And then later find out they're actually the bad guys.

We needed the kett to be a credible, fleshed out antagonistic race. Ditto the Archon.

That's not a plot - those are story elements.  A plot requires a priority conflict/tension or else it's not going to be a very interesting story for long.

As per this thread's title, we didn't "need" the kett, but we needed something more than exploration and planet specific enemies.  ME has always relied upon really good storytelling and that's why most of the fans love the series - it's an addicting and in-depth universe.

Think of every great game you've played in the last decade that has a main story and think about that game's core plot elements.  I guarantee you you'll be able to identify one overwhelming conflict that drives the plot.

The true issue here isn't the kett - it's their implementation and role in the universe.