From what I've gathered, it seems a lot of people got very upset with the direction of the latest Alien movies. I find this interesting, since most people also praise the cinematography, acting, sets, aesthetics and atmosphere. The problem seems to primarily lie with the plot and direction of the franchise, as these movies explored new topics and subjects as well as telling a new story within the universe. I suppose a lot of people just wanted the original alien again.
What I think people sort of forget, is just how stale the Alien formula got by Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection. Alien (1979) was a very fresh and unique movie at the time and was extremely influential. Aliens (1986) stayed fairly fresh by pivoting the genre more towards action, with a different group of characters. Because of this change Aliens to me felt like a pretty natural continuation from Alien and didn't get stale. Alien 3 and eventually Alien Resurrection felt very uninspired and stale, and mainly relied on the Alien IP more than anything. It simply took the original Alien and changed a few minor details while essentially keeping the exact same formula.
So keeping that in mind, I think it was a smart move to evolve the franchise and explore more aspects than the constant reappearance of the already known Xenomorph for the 5th and 6th time. I also then want to raise a point, that Proemtheus and Alien: Covenant in fact felt very faithful to the franchise. For, as many people forget, in the very first movie they stumble upon a large creature later known as an engineer and that whole aspect was left out by all the sequels. Ridley Scott created Alien, so it isn't crazy to assume this guy had a view this world where it was suppose to go.
I am a major fan of this series and can find at least some enjoyment in nearly all the movies. However, I think I enjoy Ridley Scott's direction of the series the most.