1. The skill thing could work. Just make a 15 strength a +15 to strength checks. Easy as pie. And it wouldn't cause any meaningful problems that I can think of. It probably should have been done a long time ago. In fact, ability scores probably SHOULD have been dropped down by 10 points, and THEN unified with ability score bonuses. Its ridiculous to have a stat that's really just a seed value for a different stat that does all the heavy lifting.
2. We've had it confirmed by a playtester that a fully healthy PC can be killed all the way dead in a single critical hit. So, bear that in mind as a reference when thinking about the ogre with the slit throat, or the dead paladin.
3. Critical hits that kill fully healthy PCs are probably deal breakers for me. If combat is supposed to be so dangerous that a single crit can kill my PC, then one of two things need to happen. Either the game needs to be non story based, and revolve around disposable characters so that I don't care when they die... or else the game has to be designed such that actual combat almost never happens because the PCs have the tools and inclination to avoid it. I don't for a minute believe that 5e will feature either of these- D&D has been about killing monsters in creative ways for far too long for it to completely reverse course now. More likely this is being included to satisfy those who feel that the potential for death-by-random-number-generation is crucial to their sense of danger in combat. My interests are diametrically opposed to these.
4. 10 foot poles aren't necessarily a deal breaker, but they're a warning sign. I'm not a fan of gotcha games. Hopefully the game will have some clear instructions for DMs on how to use these game elements well. If you put in just one random, unmarked door that HIDEOUSLY PUNISHES the PCs because they forgot to do a door-check routine, you're training your players that in your game they have to do this on every door, always. That gets old fast.
5. When 3e came out, I was able to very easily, very quickly recognize things that 3e would let me do that my previous D&D edition did not. This really excited me. The same was true of 4e. Even just by looking at the leaked 4e character sheets, I could see character concepts and ways of playing that didn't exist under previous editions, or which were supposed to exist... but didn't really exist as viable choices. In both cases this was the major selling point for me. The implicit, "Look at this edition! It lets you do NEW THINGS! Things you couldn't do before! Things that the rules promised but prevented you from doing! Things you always wanted to do! Things you didn't want to do because you never thought of, but now you can!"
I'm not getting that yet from the promotional material for 5e. At least from a marketing perspective, they seem to be aiming it much towards a message like, "Remember all that stuff you USED to do? You can do it again, now with a living, actively supported game!" That marketing strategy isn't going to work on me. In fact, its a bit counter productive. I don't LIKE the tropes of Dungeons and Dragons. The thing I'm most proud of as a DM is my ability to get past those and craft a coherent world and a coherent story. So shout-outs to these things just make me unhappy.
I expect new editions to have things like cleaned up math. So while I'm happy for a sensible skill system, and I'm happy for a flatter math progression, and I'm REALLY happy for the brutal, unmourned death of the +1 sword, I need to hear about what this edition will do for me that other editions won't.