I'm reserving final judgment for release and of course would be delighted to see a new graphical champion in open world, but from the stylized nature of the art to the technical bounds, W3 doesn't look like it is out to fulfill some of those wishes.
We don't know what kind of open or how complex W3 systems actually are. We know it's regions are divided more like Inquisition, as partially traversable smaller maps, than Unity or Skyrim, with a large almost fully traversable single large map.
Point of the DAI gif is that it has static lighting like Unity (which compromises a transition day/night cycle for more consistent and complex polish on the lighting and how it looks on surfaces), and a heavily active foliage presence. So different lighting, similar environment. We won't know until release for sure, but it seems obvious that lighting on the leaves of W3 is much flatter than Inquisition in light, shortening the gap in visual advancement that W3 has in some scenes due to the lighting. Some will say it is better overall for having dynamic light, but that doesn't mean it actually looks better in any brief moment or image.
And Unity is a massive, detailed space. Square footage for the player to explore is massive when accounting for the hundreds of interiors with multiple floors, rooftops, outer structures on buildings, ground space, secondary maps, etc. So while Unity is not the traditional RPG, it has a very dense with POI space, and very large map. It's not disqualified as open world just because it is a city.
And so far, the highs of Unity are notably higher than the highs of W3.