Being tall makes it visible. Being tall means it gets added to the total city view. 4-7 story landscrapers do not fit this bill. Worcester's downtown looks the same as it did 30 years ago (only worse due to the destructive policies) because nothing tall enough to stand out has been built since then.
If you want to be overly proud about the types of developments that we regularly pan when they're built by Alewife, that's your prerogative. It's also the reason why Worcester is a complete waste of time and energy for most people on this board. A single visit to see the remaining historical structures is all that's necessary, and then the city has given no reason to ever go back (except minor league baseball I guess).
The one thing we can agree on is that height isn't the end-all be-all for a city. If it was, I wouldn't have Worcester so far behind other New England cities like Portland, Lowell, Portsmouth, and Salem. It's just that when you already have such a lame downtown then the only thing that's going to make me want to revisit is building something of architectural significance. Instead Worcester chooses to regularly go in the other direction. It feels like the city still hasn't recovered from 1953.