Gonna keep this short as I have a deadline coming up and I shouldn't really be spending time typing on a forum -- but can't really stay away either
I am a strange beast, I did back the project -- and not just the 15$ pledge either -- but I was 80% sure that I would HATE the game. Now that must sound crazy so let me explain.
I love partybased-tactical-combat. I hate party-based-roleplaying.
What I mean with this is simply that I want one viewpoint character or clearly identified avatar, rather then being the whole party. Making decisions for the whole party is find, but roleplaying every character in the party just isn't compelling to me. I am 1 person IRL -- no matter what the voices tell me -- and that's just how I attach myself to roleplaying games.
If I play a P&P game I don't play all partymembers, even if I'm in a party with 4 characters and I'm the only player in the game. Normally the DM fills the role of the other 3 characters.
I would say that DA:O came close to what I would want from a party-based-RPG except that I would have wanted to see more focus on tactics and have it clearly turnbased.
The moment someone says party-based-RPG however it seems to be you have to roleplay all characters, not just control them which saddens me as that's a game I would love to play. This thread does however throw around some interesting ideas at was I would imagine being as close to a compromise that there will sadly ever be, but I feel I would like to add my voice to the discussion as well.
As I have seen that it can be confusing I will define some definition that I will use below.
PC = The Player Character, the avatar of the player, the viewpoint character.
PCC = Player Controlled Character. This is not an avatar of the player nor a viewpoint character but is still controlled in the same way -- to some extent -- as the Player Character.
NPC = None Player Character. Not controlled by the Player at all.
Ideally I would love to see that the core of 4 rangers would have been made up of 1 PC and 3 PCCs up to 4PCs.
The different PCCs could be archetypes that you could modify, within reason, or completely locked to their archetypes. They would ideally have their own personalties, but would follow the PCs directions.
Now I do not suspect that this will happen but that is my dream scenario. I'm not picky either, their personalities might be downplayed with maybe just some none-interactable banter and some predefined responses for some dialogues, just to show that they are their own characters rather than another PC. NPCs on the other hand should be fleshed out characters, but I'm ok if the PCCs aren't that fleshed out.
I feel I should also say, just to give some reference of where I'm coming from, that I have never played the original Wasteland. The closest I got to the party-based-gameplay was the NWN2 expansion Storm of Zehir -- which I never could get into due to the party-dialogue-mechanic. Though from what I have read here I think I could recommend it to those who want a more modern Party-based-game.
The closest I have gotten to party-based-gameplay, that I liked however would be DA:O or KOTOR (not sure if Arcanum let you control your companions).
Sorry for the long post, seems I failed at keeping this short
-TSDEDIT: Fixed some typos -- probably still a lot left :/