Umbran said:
So far, we've tried a couple of sessions of 4e, just to get the mechanics down. They work well enough, but they don't incite our collective imagination much on their own.
it may be that 4e is good because it gets the mechanics out of everyone's way, but we kind of prefer rules that actually support what we're trying to do a bit more than that.
I'm mostly in the boat with our esteemed moderator, here. 4e just "blahs" the heck out of me.
Now, as far as this as a "trend," I dunno. 4e is definitely a contentious edition in a way that 3e really wasn't. It seems that more folks hate it, but it also seems that a whole busload of folks love it. I do know I was a bit surprised at the number of people still playing 3.5 in the Rouse's "tell me about your group" thread. By the numbers and by the buzz, I would've expected 4e's penetration to be higher.
I'm happy playtesting FFØ at the moment, and I'll check out Pathfinder when it comes out, and there's always T20 when I want something wacky. I'll play 4e ('cuz I'll play dang near anything, FATAL and maybe Rollmaster aside

), but I won't run it and I won't choose it.
4e just isn't successfully competing for my game time. What would show a trend, perhaps, is if sales for the Player's Guide to FR and Adventurer's Vault are drastically fallen off from the Core sales. People bought it, read it, and aren't interested, would be a possible implication. But it would have to be DRASTIC, and you'd have to control for things like FR Haters and Low-Magic games and the like, probably....
But my guess is they're probably chuggin' along just fine, if not reaping big rewards (and they could be reaping big rewards!).