I think chess can be difficult to appreciate for many reasons, but computers beating humans is probably at the bottom of that list, if not on the opposite list

I think chess can be difficult to appreciate for many reasons, but computers beating humans is probably at the bottom of that list, if not on the opposite list of reasons to be encouraged to play as you already explained. Anyway, I can only speak for my past self and a few people I've known, but it's usually simple why people don't play. It can be socially unappealing if there's no tradition of playing chess within their circle or that the people that do play might be snobs about it. It can be difficult to feel encouraged to play since the game itself is complex enough to require more attention than expected and the jargon is confusing. The names of openings, tactics, etc. are not necessarily literal enough, and even when expressed in notation are still vague due to the nature of the game (many variations). For many people there's also a lack of motivation and it just seems unproductive, especially when it becomes clear that winning, even against the weakest AI, isn't common when starting out. Like any game, chess can help improve analytical thinking, but it's abstract enough to not be obvious how. If it's not made a pleasant enough experience, it's just easier to do something else.