I'm going to lay it on the line here, and I don't care how popular my opinion is. I want D&D to be playable as much like I prefer as possible. For me, that's the various, but closely related ways TSR did it. The way WotC has radically changed the game multiple times over their stewardship annoys me. During 3e, 3.5, and early 5e I could still mostly do this, because even if the rules were different the philosophy was similar enough that I could make it work. In the last few years WotC has changed why they make D&D in an way too obvious for me to ignore, and that's why I've rejected the company (if not the game as other companies have expressed it).
I would offer an alternate take, though probably not a positive one for you. They haven't changed why they make the game- they do that to make money and to provide an RPG product which a maximal number of players will use and enjoy.
3rd ed was driven by a lot of the same play concepts as AD&D, but taken to a greater extreme. Rationalize and systematize and regularize even further. Adding skills and feats was a way to rationalize and systematize things that had to rely on GM fiat before. The "non-game" components as Gary might have called them, had he looked at AD&D with the same critical gaze he once applied to OD&D. But you can see the clear lineage here. Read AD&D and 3E spell descriptions side by side and you can find a huge percentage of verbiage retained, for example.
4th ed took a different tack, probably for a combination of reasons. One being that executive management wanted to get out of the OGL, so they needed a sufficiently-different edition that the OGL & SRD couldn't be used to replicate it. Another, being, I'm guessing, that GIVEN that design mandate, the actual designers decided to address some problems or areas of contention (Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard among them) which D&D had, and tackle them ambitiously. And I think as part of this effort, they got away from the more Simulationist stance you prefer and the game moved in a more Gamist and Narrativist direction.
5E "rolled the clock back" a bit in terms of being a compromise edition, but it's become clear that, descending from the Trad gaming culture of play (and harkening back to the Non-wargamer Sci-Fi Fans part of the two major groups of players in the 1970s), the majority of modern gamers use D&D as more a storytelling heroic game than a world-simulator a la AD&D. I don't think "WotC has changed
why they make D&D" at all, but that the past ten years of success and learning about the current player base has led them to cater to that player base in ways which appeal less to you and people with your preferences.
I think this means that you're doomed to frustration with hoping WotC will change course to cater to you more.
On the bright side, as an experienced and internet-savvy gamer, you're also aware of the OSR and tons of alternate options for D&D variants and third party publications which suit your preferences better. And those are vastly more available and conveniently accessible than they were thirty or even twenty years ago.
