Manbearcat
Legend
There is this deep seated belief, for better or worse, that if there aren't any rules for a piece of world-building, then that piece of world-building doesn't matter, or doesn't exist. I think this is true ever since each edition of D&D clarified more and more about simulating a D&D setting, as if there was a continuous demand since 1e to know more what is 'true' in the game setting.
I think the inverse is also true. There is also a large segment of the gaming populace that wants abstract conflict resolution over procedural task resolution and they want a robust, abstract design that handles (virtually) all cases (with exceptions requiring ruling backed by clear, transparent guidance) rather than a granular approach replete with multiple caveats and canvassed corner cases.
Dungeon World's very basic resolution scheme and Druid mechanics certainly don't make you feel that things off-screen don't exist and that you cannot interact with the world in the way that a standard D&D Druid would (up to and including flying as a bird). Its just a very different mindset.
These two ethoi are just directly at odds with one another. Unsurprisingly this is why I've maintained extreme skepticism at the "big tent" idea at the core of 5e! I think you can see that play out pretty well here on a day to day basis.