If you are seeing fewer "heroes" today of the type you once saw, that is probably a lot more social trending than edition-based. People are simply more jaded, and more cynical, than they were 20 years ago.
As far as heroism within the game, though, I think you might also be seeing the result of more careful encounter balancing. Of old, players were rewarded for taking on the toughest encounters they could possibly handle (in terms of XP and possible treasure), so that a "How can I handle this threat?" attitude was more prevelant. Within 3.X speak, if you could figure out a way to take the CR 5 encounter at level 1, you would do so. Of course, the modern "encounter as unit of interest" design means that what is considered an approriate 5th level encounter then and now are two different beasts.
Within the Megadungeon concept, where players choose the level they delve at, Level 1 usually contained encounters appropriate for PCs level 1-3, level 2 for PCs level 3-5, level 3 for PCs 5-7, etc. There was a flatter power curve, enabling lower-level PCs to reach for greater heights as those heights were defined by the system. An ogre is WotC-D&D is simply more likely to win a fight against level 1 PCs than an ogre was in TSR-D&D, because the scaling is different. What you might accomplish through luck, wit, and gumption in 1e is far too often suicidal in 3e.
This is, actually, one of the effects that I am trying to re-engineer into RCFG....a flatter power curve, allowing lower-level PCs to have a chance against higher-level monsters.
And, for the record, it isn't that difficult to house rule any edition of D&D to make it closer to the normatives of 1e. Several good house rules have been suggested on EN World (mostly to reduce combat grind) that would also help to flatten the power curve in 4e. Well, the monster power curve, anyway. Chief among them? Half the total hit points of all non-minion monsters.
RC
