Ok, and I'm prefacing this by saying I don't think the companies have been at all opposed to one another (at least publicly) but that I've observed what I imagine to be a healthy level of venom mostly among certain fans of either edition.
The reason I'm starting this thread is that I found I'm caught in a really difficult spot and I want to express it:
I love the 4e rules, but the Pathfinder campaign setting is one of the best sourcebooks I've read.
Really, it's awkward for me. I worry that I'll get flamed, but I have to say it: I love the work that's coming out of both companies right now. I feel like I'm a part of a silent minority, but I've discovered that I'm really enjoying what both sides are coming up with.
As a DM I can't fathom running a 3.x campaign, certainly not straight out of any one book. 4th Edition is the best game to run for me, as it's relatively simple to come up with encounters and stories that I enjoy. Moreover, the R&D has come out with every class (except psionics and necromancers) that I need for running old school D&D adventures that I enjoy. Monster design means I can whip up a lot of unique solo or elite monsters of a particular role, and just say "yeah, that's Halaster Blackcloak" and Bam, I'm done.
Even the setting information is great fun, and of the pile of books I've grabbed, I'm happy to say there hasn't been a flop yet.
However, while I don't like the rules set for 3.x, I am so glad that Paizo still exists. My subscription to Dragon and Dungeon magazines was just in time to roll over into Pathfinder. I had a financial scaling back, and hadn't planned to run a 3.x game since 4e came out; I didn't renew, though I did buy several of their other books for a good read. Part of that was that the rules seemed like beating a dead horse, despite a genuine enthusiasm about the material that was coming out.
Then I picked up the Pathfinder Campaign setting. Just recently, this week. Virtually no rules, mostly flavour and crunchy setting info. I'm really blown away, and experiencing a real frustration that this is the campaign setting I would love to play in, but not the rules set. I'm going to work the money to be able to buy up all the other setting books, I think, and some of the modules. Having bought a number of the other AP books, I've decided that Paizo really has a powerhouse of incredibly talented people out there.
In effect, WOTC got the rules I need (for learning style and gaming group), while Paizo got the flavour and setting.
My dilemma: is it ethical to hope both sides continue their competition for the hearts and minds of the gaming community, simply because so much amazing material has come out of this?
I feel like a kid whose parents got divorced, but is getting piles of gifts from both sides; however, I have to leave one set at one parent's house, the other at the other's.