I agree with your first sentence. However still curious why the attention died so quickly away.
I can only speak for myself. I had the K3 and the K1, both of which have the pixel-shift technology. There were two main reasons for my not keeping the Pentax K1,
(1) the Pentax lenses available (in general) were no up to what I require for my work. I made a point of hunting down and testing various better lenses, like the Voiglander 90mm and Voigtlancer CV-125 in Pentax format and testing these, as well. But they, as nice as they are, finally fitted into the second reason, below.
(2) The Pentax K1 made it difficult to used adapted lenses on the body. Ultimately, the results I was getting were not worth (for me) the effort it took to get them. And the pixel-shift technology on the K1 (while good as a proof-of-concept) was not ready for Prime Time. It only worked with no movement, which was OK with me, and even then there were all kinds of smears, blurs, etc. that muddied the waters. So, I applaud the concept of pixel-shifting, but not this iteration of it... IMO. Others will obviously disagree, but what's new?