Going from the bigger picture view here, I can kind of see why Apple doesn't want to support our older machines. At the end of the day, it comes down to money. (Not from forcing people to buy new machines though)
Obviously, quite a few older machines (eg: the 5,1 MP and other machines from 2012-2015 once they have been upgraded with SSD's, more RAM, Metal-capable GPUs for the MP...) can run Ventura and other new releases of macOS just as good as any of the last-gen Intel Macs with OpenCore Legacy Patcher. The same can be said for machines from the Penryn-Sandy Bridge era.
Here, most of us know how to use a patcher, know the risks involved, and can troubleshoot issues if they arise. However, when the average consumer (not very tech-savvy in terms of using "hack" tools) sees that their old machine can run a new OS (that supports modern apps and services out of the box), they will most likely go and install it without doing the necessary research (i.e: mech drives vs SSD / Metal support).
In some cases, they already have an SSD, and a Metal-capable GPU, however in other cases they don't have either. Which can lead to an unpredictable experience. It may work fine enough (up to their standards), or it could be borderline unusable.
That concept can be applied to if Apple decided to let older machines run the newest macOS natively (or supported the use of patchers). The cost of supporting older machines that may or may not work well on the latest releases is probably not worth the amount of users in the bigger picture who want to run the latest macOS on older hardware.
For most people in that situation, running Windows 10 or some Linux distro is the much better option, given hardware compatibility is typically more lenient.