I think it depends on the player's ideals. Some people want a game they can play that doesn't require hours of muscle memory training, while others need something that separates themselves from a player that hasn't put in the time to develop it. Some people say it raises the skill ceiling or adds depth, but mostly what it does is make the gap between casual and hardcore larger. A hardcore player isn't necessarily more skilled than a casual player, they just devote more time to the game and learning the little nuances. Time spent does not = skill, but it does give players that want something to work towards another goal. This same argument is made about fighting games that require the player to memorize and practice over and over long combo chains in order to compete. Sadly, that is a big turn off for people that like the game but don't want to spend hours exercising their muscle memory. It's a shallow way to add depth but is commonly accepted as the norm.
Well, the trickjumping in virtually every shooter out there that ever did it well wasn't something deliberately laid out from the start. In Quake, Half Life/CS/Source games, ect, it's been an exploit or series of exploits in the persistent player physics system that people have found, and learned to abuse to gain an advantage. The only times it started out as something deliberate with a new engine, it wound up being shallow and missing much of what made it fun to begin with.(Painkiller, for example)
I understand that the casualization of the arena FPS genre is not what people want, but is there no other way to add depth to the movement that doesn't rely heavily on muscle memory? I've said it before, the depth to the movement in Quake doesn't come from training the muscle memory, but rather from knowing how to use those techniques effectively. Training the muscle memory is merely and obstacle in the way of properly playing the game.