As I've posted several times before, much of OCZ's old SSD issues were with the early models, especially with early firmware. From the Vertex2 series onwards, with the final firmware, they're very good drives, and ideal for non-PC systems that do not support TRIM (or indeed WinXP). I have dozens of OCZ V2E/V3 drives, no problems with any of them so far.
What's sad is the FUD continued long after OCZ had moved to completely different controllers with the Vertex4 and Vector, both of which were really good (still are). I've fitted V4s in industrial systems to replace FastSCSI2 disks (ie. fitted in SCSI/SATA bridge boxes) and they work very well. I was less impressed with the Vector 180 though (just too expensive).
Today though, cost really is a huge issue for most buyers. Much though I like my older OCZ SSDs, most of my recent purchases have been Samsung 850s (though I bagged some Arc 100s when I had the chance, they are rather good), so unless the RD400 pricing shifts significantly, my next M.2 purchase will still be a 950 Pro.
The problem with the OCZ brand name is that perceptions go well beyond their early SSD issues, ie. PSUs and RAM (though I wish people would stop being so hypocritical, given the screwups that both Intel and Samsung have had aswell), and indeed OCZ DDR2 RAM had a particularly bad rep IIRC (don't know much about their PSUs). Ironic though, I have an old AM2 system that's still running fine with OCZ RAM, but then it's not a mega performance beast, just a 6000+ and 8800GT.
Funny thing about their support though, recently I asked if they could replace a Vector 512GB which I did explain I'd bought on ebay a year before; to my surprise, they replaced it with a Vector 180 480GB without quibble; wasn't expecting that at all, and I doubt most other vendors would have done such a thing.