About adding 3D, it is a long discussion we could have but I also remember when Broken Sword and some other went 3D, same controversy.
And look what happened to Revolution after Broken Sword 3 failed to meet expectations.
They had to "downsize" to stay afloat, and nearly all their employees lost their jobs.
Broken Sword 5 was point-and-click for good reason. It's what fans of the series wanted.
Do you know of a single point-and-click adventure game series that succeeded after changing to keyboard/gamepad controls?
A logical choice was made and I guess if we have stayed on 2D, half of the comments will reproach us to be "stuck in the 2000's"...
It's not "logical" to be more concerned about imaginary potential "stuck in the 2000's" comments than about ease of use. What is logical is to use the right tool for the job.
It's also nonsense to claim point-and-click controls are "stuck in the 2000's" when they've been a viable control scheme ever since mice started being used with computers in the 1980's. There are current RPG's and platformers using point-and-click controls, and there are plenty of complaints when an action game uses keyboard or gamepad for aiming when mouse is much more precise. The control scheme should depend on the type of game and what the gamer is expected to do in the game, not on some marketing idiot's idea of what a modern interface is supposed to be.
By the way, gamepads were used at least as long ago as the 1980's and keyboards even before that. So if you want to say point-and-click controls are "stuck in the 1980's" or "stuck in the 2000's" you have to say the same thing about gamepads and keyboards. There is nothing "stuck" about using what works and there is everything wrong with using something that doesn't work as well (or doesn't work at all) just to be different.