Has any game in history been more prone for a Next-Gen remaster than ME:A?

Well, the angara had already had plenty of contact with the exiles, so their translators could have done it. But then they should have switched to English as soon as they saw that the Tempest was an AI ship.

Regarding the switch to English, it probably would've been better off if the Angara switched languages right on the comms, and if asked about that upon landing, they'd basically crush any ideas that this was true first contact by explaining how they've made contact with others from the Initiative a long time ago. 

I'd be fine with even just further animation fixes (and that pie in the sky idea of fixing the NPC asaris)

It's not a handwave. It's just a fact about the situation. Turns out it wasn't actually first contact even though Ryder thought it was.

I cannot see an overall positive reception for something like this especially if EA has to go back and recreate content for it. Think of the Extended Cut for Mass Effect 3, I see something like this going over just as well and they probably had the funds to go back and to do it because of its success.

NO MYSTERY?

The Vaults and their creators? I felt the same thirst to know more as I had after ME1 and the Reapers

I bet if you replayed it and this time paid attention to the story, it would feel like a totally new game.

I think people are misunderstanding what it seems BioWare wanted too do with the procedural planets they were trying to create.  It was to compliment the planets we got in the game so Eos would have been designed the way it was presented to us in the final project, but there would have been additional smaller planets to land on like in the UNC missions in Mass Effect 1 which would have been the procedural planets.  The way I read posts around here I think people think that system would have been a bigger part of the game then what it was.  I cannot find the articles, but that is how it has been described by others.  So that might have given you your things like what you have on your list, of course combat is a cheap way to extend the time people spend in an area as well.

I think it wouldn't take much to tweak/edit the flow of the game in such a way that you could improve the experience. The assets are already in-game and it would just be a matter of how you would let them be revealed during the course of your advancement through the game.

I've put over 700 hrs into the game and I would say, despite some questionable dialogue/narrative, one of its biggest issues is it feels like an unedited movie at times. For example, after you complete the initial Eos settlement, and go off to Voeld/Havarl, you wait for the radiation levels to decrease so you can access the rest of the planet. When you come back, though, instead of a manageable handful of quests and plotpoints, it's an explosion of "stuff to do!". I think if you kept the initial missions on a planet to main missions associated with establishing its viability (activating vaults, planet/plot-related missions) it would be more focused and you would have a better idea where to go and what to do as opposed to the thought of "do I need to do this?".

Once the viability of a planet is at 100%, you could start opening sections for exploration depending on the percentage of the overall game you completed. So, for example, after returning back to Eos, you now have access to an increased perimeter-area of the planet, the center being Podromos, where you could get the memory triggered but the area where Ben Mousani was fighting the Kett would still be out of reach for the moment. Also, I think they would better served with distinguishing the viability of the planet and the overall control of the planet. This way, the planet could be viable for settlement but there is still the threat of Kett attack that could compromise the settlements and the Initiative's future. So, in this case, missions like Settlement #2, Ben Mousani's mission, etc and their successful completion would reduce Kett forces and increase your overall control of the planet.

Additionally, you could make the "Military" or "Science" outpost choice mean something on each planet. So, for Eos, selecting "Military" means your outposts are better defended but maybe it effects the morale of the civilian scientists settled there while always reducing the security presence on the Nexus since military personnel are finite assets. Conversely, if you choose "Science Outpost", you maybe get bonuses for research and development, also maybe something like a planetary defense grid, but the settlements are more prone to attack. Each planet could have it's own unique concerns with choosing "science" or "military".

This could also be true on the Nexus. You could actually make side-missions like "First Murderer" and "Station Sabotage" related to the Jien Garson's murder investigation and maybe even a possible conspiracy of "Nexus Uprising" sympathizers.

So, as you progress along within the game, the aspect gets less and less funneled giving you the option of pursuing the more focused narrative/companion missions or going back to get Eos 100% within control of the Initiative.

This is just spitballing, obviously, but they are observations I was making as I was playing it so you'd have less inclination to self-edit and more agency in Heleus.

I think that is what would improve the story, for at least in my opinion you need structure in the game to progress the story in some ways.  Since BioWare likes to have an unstructured character as a protagonist a more structured world would help tie things together instead of feeling like everything is isolated.

Way less OW.  Way less wandering around forever trying to find that quest marker that's actually two levels down but you can't tell...yeah, get rid of that.  Structured, yes, but also have the ability to really punish Peebee and Liam for their stupidity.  Which is to say, if your squadmates can do colossally stupid things in future games, they ought to be able to be punished appropriately.  Not murdered.  We're not Saren and shouldn't stoop to his level (which is how I feel about anyone who kills Mordin).  However, they could be removed from the squad and replaced with someone else.  It would obviously affect any potential romancing of the original or replacement but it's worth it.  (Hell, maybe you look the other way because it is your LI, and perhaps there's a consequence for that as well.)

Well, yes, but there was no one in their place until you got them - if you got them.  I see the Pathfinder team as all having specific roles.  Those roles might be necessary.  I'm also thinking of having the replacements be people you already interact with in some way, just not as squadmates until needed.  But, sure, it could be that the consequence is fewer squadmates.  That in itself should have an additional consequence of less downtime and therefore less stamina in the field.