I think that alignment is an interesting feature of D&D as a matter of flavour, but the more gets mechanically tied to it, the more awkward things can get. I like alignment and it's a good way to help define your character, but it should be descriptive, not prescriptive. I think that in general it's best when alignment only impacts magical, realm stuff involving it, as opposed to too much stuff in the material plane. Alignment can potentially provide some really deep, interesting character insights-I point to Wrath of the Righteous as a high bar for it being done well, but alignment is vital to that game in a very real sense, with the story revolving around it in a way. And Owlcat writers are really good and already had practice with the system. I honestly do not believe that Owlcat has the writing chops to pull alignment off with the kind of interesting nuance that would make it a benefit to the game rather than a hinderance.
And as for alignment in 5e and it being deemphasized, I really don't think it takes away that much to have alignment be more of a background, setting feature than anything else. Many, maaaany games lack an alignment feature (most games, in fact) and it doesn't harm the game at all.
