My group never made the jump from 2e to 3e so I can't make any comparisons about game play.  From just reading the rules it seems like 4e greatly simplified gameplay without going back to the make up the rules on the fly that 1e/2e needed.

I like that every class always has something unique and worthwhile to do in every combat.  I like that you can take every class in multiple directions.  All the races and classes have a unique flavor in keeping with a fantasy setting.  I like that they helped out 1st level characters so that low level encounters are not so deadly.  I like that they seem to have eliminated 1 shot kills from the game.  No save or die stuff in this edition.  I really like that level draining is completely gone.  Minions are a cool idea.

I am concerned about the length of combat.  Just doing the math on higher level encounters and the characters ability to dish out damage, it seems like the fights are going to drag on a little.  I'll have to actually play them to get a good read on them though.

 

I have been playing since 1983 in Jr. High and feel each edition has had improvements.  I liked 3.x a lot and wasn't very happy about changing it but after playing 4e I must admit that I enjoy it and can see how it will speed up play and make high level play easier which hopefully means more fun (I have impatient players who dislike a slow pace of endless math and difficult game play and I can't blame them).

I have thousands of dollars in 3rd edition books but I will still change and hope some remain somewhat useful in the grand scheme of things.  I will defintely not hesitate to go back to third edition with all my books and adventures if I become disenchanted with 4e, but I will give it a chance and spend more money (what can I say I'm a sucker).

  I am really looking forward to high level play now and that wasn't the case with 3rd edition.  I think the new stat blocks are also more understandable and easier to use.  Encounters with pc levels will now be easier to operate without being a master at every class ever created.  3.x really frustrated me with all these character level opponents, especially since I play once a week and have a family and a job.  I never had time to master all these classes and had only played a few myself before becoming a full time DM.

What I like about 4e is the special abilities of each class from a leg sweep by a fighter type to spell abilities by wizards that are at-will powers.  I also like the array of actions possible on one turn because of the standard action, move action, and minor action, plus the possible free action.  It just seems like the categories are better thought out and allow you to do much more in a turn with certain classes like the cleric. 

I know a cleric doesn't have to be the group medic and when I made one I saw myself as more of a fighter, but others in the group expect you to sit and heal them and this annoys some people.  There is nothing worse than people telling others how they should run their character, but this is why some feel clerics become medics.  I have a few high maintance people in our group who are constantly try to steal the spotlight from others or run "the show" so to speak, and I know when the cleric in the group doesn't heal him when he needs it he complains about the cleric for the next two weeks.  Some people just aren't blessed with common sense or proper social graces, and think they know it all and are always willing to tell you about it.  Just turn the other cheek and hope they eventually figure it out, but some never do.  Our "must be the center of attention character" is slowly improving but he still has his moments where we all want to roll our eyes. 

I am a bit weird when it comes to 4E D&D. A lot of the stuff I like I also find disenchanting.

A few examples are the new PC classes. They scale easier, are easier to handle at higher levels and have no dead levels. But I hate them for that to. It's a bit too static and compartmentalized for my taste. Want to be a dual dagger weilding rogue? Well, you *can* but be prepared to spend a lot of feats and time on it.

I like the way skills are easier to progress through but find them to be a limited as well. No more bluffing (trained) unless your class allows it or you take a feat. In 3.5 I liked how you could dabble in other skills.

I like minions as a DM for disrupter pieces (catching things on fire, holding down PCs) but hate them as a player. As a player I feel I am just going through the motions to get to the BBEG. As a DM they do allow for some more creativity when creating encounters.

PCs are tough, but a little too tough. I have found, as both a player and DM, that unless you go above the XP pool alloted for an encounter then the PCs usually win out with little issue. I have read about TPKs but usually those came from poor encounter design (way too high level enemy) and not player tactics. I literally have never feared for my Warlocks life or for my Swordmages either. As a DM I get frustrated that a well balanced encounter usually means a mop up for the players unless I specifically stack the terrain against them.

I like how things are back to a more DMs fiat kind of play but cringe to think if I played under a DM who had no idea what he was doing or was having a bad day.

I suppose my biggest issue has nothing to do with 4E at all. I simply never had an issue with all of the math, optimizing, splatbooks or mechanics that came with 3.5. Of course, some people did so 4E is probably best for them. That is a good thing for the community to have that option.