Well, that's one pessimistic way to look at it. I'm hoping the poor patch quality and speed for Catacylsm means that they're spending that effort on Mists instead. I'd bet money that based on everything that happened after Cata launched, the sequence of events was this:
1. Blizzard intends to re-do 1-60, and it ends up being a lot more work than they planned on.
2. Cataclysm ends up being way behind schedule, and Blizzard struggles to get 80-85 and 1-60 done.
3. Instead of working on patch content as Cataclysm's release date came closer (as they had done with TBC and Wrath), Blizzard was struggling to to finish launch content.
4. Cataclysm finally launches and takes the longest out of any expansion Blizzard has done for WoW, meaning that Blizzard didn't originally plan for people to do ICC for a year.
5. Once it was clear that Cataclysm was not a big success and that subscriber numbers were dropping, Blizzard decided to reduce the scope of patches (and the total number) so that they can get the next expansion out faster and focus on recapturing players who quit at 85 after being bored within the first two months of the expansion. The next expansion would include more level cap content which is what keeps existing players around.
6. 4.1 (which would have included Troll dungeons and Firelands) was split into two patches "because people weren't done with T11 yet". The actual reason was to try and space out content patches since one major content patch (Abyssal Maw) was scrapped.
7. 4.1 is released with ZG/ZA remakes. ZG was probably remade earlier, and it shows in the scope of changes they made. ZA remake is more of a re-balancing than a re-make, which probably wasn't the original plan. The more ambitious plans for ZA were likely scrapped.
8. Firelands (4.2) is also reduced in scope, likely with less bosses than they originally planned for.
9. Blizzard decides to move the most of the teams to MoP early instead of having them work on 4.3. The result is that 4.3 is mostly rehashed art assets with a small boss count, but the trade off is that Blizzard can get MoP launched within a more reasonable time frame.
That's my theory on why Cataclysm patch content has been so slow/awful, and why 4.3 continues the trend. Although, it doesn't really make sense for them to knowingly release 4.3 with poor quality content when SWTOR will be coming out just a few weeks later. I'm guessing they figured they would have a better shot long-term at competing with SWTOR if they release MoP sooner, rather than having 4.3 be really awesome (or having a 4.4) but launching MoP later. That could completely blow up in their faces if SWTOR has good hooks and a decent patch cycle planned.
It's possible that I'm wrong and 5.0/MoP will suck too, which would indicate that Blizzard had moved its resources elsewhere and WoW was no longer top-dog at Blizzard. Certainly the fact that MoP will launch with fewer and shorter 5-mans than Cataclysm is worrying. But I'm really looking forward to panderen, monks, and another expansion focusing on level cap content.
As for the no 'central foe' thing, I think it's a silly complaint. Wrath was the only expansion where the 'central foe' on the box successfully carried the expansion. Illidan was the central foe in TBC, but they didn't really sell it in the quests, and the stories of side-villains like Kael'thas were emphasized almost as much and were sometimes more compelling. Vanilla had no central villain and it never felt like something was missing. Hell, for me personally C'thun was the most intimidating of any villain they've had us fight, and he came out of nowhere and had nothing to do with WC1/2/3.
Deathwing is the central foe in Cataclysm, and he was a lame enemy to have to carry an entire expansion. He caused a bunch of turmoil in the world that you deal with the after-effects of, but otherwise he just flies around lighting zones on fire. The bosses we did fight (Cho'gal, Nef, Al'akir, Rag) didn't really feel like they were building up to something the way they should have. They were all linked to Deathwing in the lore, but that link felt weak and shallow. If they weren't focusing on having a 'central bad guy', we probably would have gotten cooler stories about those bosses that made a little more sense.
I'm looking forward to there being no central villain because it gives Blizzard the opportunity to make every villain feel like a real threat rather than an appetizer before the main course (villain on the box). WoW is running out of pre-existing central villains as well, so I think it's a good thing that they'll be moving onto new lore instead of killing another figure from WC1/2/3.
