I cannot comment on Linkin Park as I am not familiar with their music. What I can say is that, in many cases, moving forward is the only way to go. People that have been singing the same music for decades simply get forgotten when what they have to say becomes obsolete (think of all the protest singers of the 60s), and adaptability to new challenges is therefore a must. Whether they manage to do it or not (without losing their original fan base) is entirely subjective.
Personally, I liked the Police but not Sting.
I liked Simon when he was with Garfunkel, even if Garfunkel never wrote a thing.
Wham were ok, but George Michael was never as good as he’d like to be. Go back to being a boy band, George (I know most people disagree with me there, but that’s my opinion).
Madonna actually became better over the years, but that wasn’t so hard. All she had to do was learn to sing a little.
Michael Jackson moved with the times, carefully and steadily. Regardless of his personal life (which is usually what everyone is interested in) he musically went the right direction.
Paul McCartney tried, but in my opinion did not really succeed.
George Harisson on the other hand was much better without the Beatles.
Queen without Freddy Mercury are about as good as a car without an engine.
U2 sounded better when they went mainstream and people understood their music. They’re good musicians who were wasted on experimentation.
Bon Jovi were always more or less the same.
Bob Dylan sounds better as the years go by, for the simple reason that he can now afford proper musicians who play all the instruments he can’t (and better productions overall).
Elvis Presley on the other hand sounded worse, because on top of his personal problems, he overdid it with the hiring and ended up with a huge band of which he was nothing more than a figurehead.
And I always hated Depeche Mode, so whatever they do sounds just as bad as it always did to my ears.
Disclaimer: this are all personal opinions, so don’t start flaming me. You’re allowed to disagree.