ive been playing 4e for a couple of months now and ive gotta say that its not even close to the D&D game i grew up playing. this new edition has become too much like a videogame rpg. it seems to me that it puts too much focus on mini's(and what a board game effect this has on the game,geez) and collecting bonuses from every player at the table just to be able to reach some ultra high number on a d20 to be able to even hit an enemy. no longer is my character record sheet enough, now i must be aware of every power available to every person sitting at the table with me.
the element of roleplaying and cooperative story telling has been buried underneath the min/max-ing to find every way possible to use and abuse the rules on an individual level. the imagination has taken back seat to the power stats descriptions. the rules lawyers must be happy with this edition. it seems to play directly to them.
there are a few things i like with the new edition. that str/dex/con/int/wis/chr can now raise over time is great but these ridiculously high stats and anime style powers that come into play at high levels destroys the game for me. its also cool that wizards dont run out of spells so quick but most of the spells of old are none exsistent in 4e. that every race can be any class is awesome. and im glad they did away with level limits on races.
healing surges seem an excuse to plow into battle with no forethought on tactics. now you can just jump right into combat with less fear becuase you can heal yourself 11 times a day. healing potions require you use a healing surge?! very magical indeed.
ive been reading thru my 2e books and miss the good ol days of roleplaying games. 4e has given me ideas that i wish i could have used in my campaigns of old but most of 4e is just not for me.
im lucky to be playing with some great folks and if it wasnt for them i might just get rid of my 4e stuff.
MEETUP GROUP RULES!!!

Well 4e is a different game to be sure. It surely puts a focus on minis and tactical movements though in that respect it is much more like the original D&D than most folks may care to remember. (Playing without miniatures was an 'optional variant' to the way-back players.) Still by 2nd ed most new players hadnt ever seen miniatures much less played with them. While there is a whole lot of "min-maxing" to be done in 4th I saw just as much (if not more ) ind20. The difference in 4th is that some attempt to equalize options has been made.
To the rising stat thing that simply scale advancement. (Yeah but this one goes to 11) doesnt really make much of a difference story-wise. As far as healing surges go (and the use of a potion to allow them) I might point out that the ability to spend a surge in combat is ....life saving.

The basic assumptions of the game world have significantly more magic than in previous editions. Which is odd seeing how toned down paragon level mages are.  Something to consider is that the kinds of stories are not level equatable between editions. The type of character a 5th level fighter is in say 2nd edition is much different than a 5th level in 4th. In 4th the fighter will be significantly more robust and have a much more important role on the battle field. This bleeds over into the RP simply because players have a much higher expectation of character survival...(except for Sean....sorry couldn't resist.) Still battlefield tactics play a much more significant role, the role of non battlefield tactics will vary between groups.

As far the high level anime powers...well lots of them come in at even at low levels. Working around the power level is simply a matter of re-flavoring but the whole table needs to be onboard. Making the teleport actual movement story wise etc. Also 4th ed assumes that character death should be rare and not a significant obstacle. In that aspect it is a little more cartoony than previous editions.

"cartoony" with videogame rpg rules is how i would describe the whole 4e game system.

the imagination element of the 4e game seems to not matter as much as the stacking effects of numbers. you no longer have to describe what your character is doing in any detail because every power already tells you whats happening. " im using Cleave".  every action now requires a roll of some kind. no longer is the story revealed thru dialogue but thru perception rolls. players dont need to use their brains to figure things out, just roll arcana or dungeoneering and let the dm hand everything to you. poisoned? make a d20 roll with a 50/50 chance of saving.
dying? make a d20 roll with a 50/50 chance of saving.
the character sheets have gone from 1 page front and back to multiple sheets of paper. every power must now have its own card so that you know how it works. and so many effects are taking place on PC's & NPC's that we are scrounging around for colored soda bottle rings. accessories seem to be the name of the game in this edition. combat encounters take forever!
4e is about ROLLplaying and keeping up with ever changing numbers that is best left to the videogame rpg's that WotC stole the idea from. every round new numbers come in to play and the action is bogged down by math.
4e= light on story, HEAVY on numbers!
its a fun game, but for the first time its just a game and not an exercise in imagination, storytelling and roleplaying.
i never did play 3e or 3.5 because i had heard that the game was taking a wild swing in this direction.
i have so much fun with my group that 4e is worth playing. Sean, youre the best. i dont know how you keep it all together and running smoothly. i love to dm but for 4e i'll just stay a player.
4e has potential. i think im going to start a campaign grounded in 2e and add in some of the elements i like about 4e, spice it up with odds and ends from earlier editions and mix it all up into a nice home brew.
because, after all, one of the best rules D&D always had was: if you dont like it, change it. the game is yours.

If someone no longer has to describe what their character is doing it has more to do with a gaming group than with the game.

Skill checks seem the same. Its not that every action requires a roll, its that a method of resolution exists for tasks where the outcome is in doubt.

In a recent game we had a Puzzle game that our PC's had to "figure out." One of the characters isnt a very smart or wise character but they could easily contribute "out of character"  How does this character still participate in the puzzle solving while role-playing his persona? By simply Rp-ing dumb luck.."I push that lever down by 'accidentally' leaning on it."  No skill rolls required (though if the wizard had applied say history or arcane skill maybe they would have learned the rules of the game.)

That solution seems much better in terms of Role-playing than having characters figure out the puzzle in terms of the puzzle itself, which if we were being honest is what would have happened in most gaming groups in prior editions of the game regardless of the character's stats/skills.

The 4th ed combat system is more strategic than prior incarnations and the application of static effects/bonuses is intended. Granted there is a flavor crutch with each power however it is not rules/story specific. Any group’s reliance on the provided flavor is a matter of taste and even heavy reliance is much more a descriptive method than the typical "I attack with my sword" that typified the vast majority of action description in all prior editions.  Still the Rollplaying-Roleplaying dynamic is more indicative of the types of players/groups than anything inherit in the system. 

Name this rule system:
Player : "I invoke the spirit of Moradin and as the divine energy flows through my hammer I bring it crashing down on the gnoll's skull."

Player: "I swing my sword in a wide arc trying to drive the tentacled monstrosity back into the pit."

Player: "I dart out from behind the brazier behind the flame beast and slash it with my dagger before tumbling back into the shadows."

Fact is they could be any incarnation of D&D (including 4th), Tunnels and Trolls, Hack master, Runequest or even fudge. Role playing is what you do, the rule system is how you resolve those actions. Applying the system to the situation is roleplaying. Reread the descriptions of play from the basic/expert rulebook or the first edition D&D books. Based on those examples of play you might want to reassess 4th ed in terms of out of the box role-playing.

If the players you play with arent at least trying to being descriptive or they arent faced with situations that require some reasoning I wouldnt bet that a change of game system would matter much. Its simply a matter of role-playing skill. 4th ed offers those with little rp skill access to suitable descriptions of actions (though they are all based on some key assumptions which arent necessarily universally applicable to every setting.) If your group is just "I use cleave" it seems equitable to "I swing my sword" which isnt a problem with the system..its an issue of roleplaying skill.

this is great! debate for its sake. thanks for letting me know what you think.
"The 4th ed combat system is more strategic than prior incarnations and the application of static effects/bonuses is intended."
im not too sure about this. strategy has always been a big part of the game. at least in my games. but i must admit that i do love a little "hack & slash" at times.
"static effects" ??? in this edition, without all the mini's, colored rings and note taking on who's powers are doing what for you and how long, combat would be near impossible. the numbers needed to perform actions change too much. and for me that just comes across more like a video game. people used to complain that THAC0 was hard! now youre trying to roll 30's+ with a d20. too much focus is put on stacking numbers. at least for me.
still, not a bad game.

I have yet to buy a single mini. Is it like 5 for $20?