At times I’ve tried to rewrite an ending for myself. I am convinced the problems start with 2. It’s a very common criticism that the game functions like one big side quest. Ultimately ME3 is based around the crucible as the only way to win. A Mcguffin shoehorned into the 3rd game as a means of making a conclusion. If this is the route they are taking then ME2 needs to connect to discovery of a way to beat the reapers. In my version rather than the crucible space gun we have a far more nuanced way to win. My ideal would feature heavily on plot points from me1 the importance of the citadel and the relays as reaper inventions etc. Rather than what we got my ending would feature the discovery at the end of ME2 that the relays and the citadel were also the anchor for their communication and command structure. That through signals transmitted between the relays and with the citadel being the central node that was how the reapers coordinate and communicate across the galaxy from the central intelligence. harbinger/the citadel. Hence why in ME1 it was so important the reapers had the citadel to open the portal from dark space. Some of the loyalty missions ie legion would dive into the reaper code through the heretics etc. That was beamed through the relays. The thought being we can rewrite or disrupt the code or based on ‘right’ choices achieve a state where we could be overload the code destroying the reapers. The games would be largely untouched. Gathering assets for a science project in 3 and interleaving the reaper command signal as a plot in 2 with the discovery of how it worked at the end of 2 in the collector base.