Yeah, it's odd. JURASSIC PARK and JURASSIC WORLD are nearly identical to each other, with the latter boasting better special effects. Maybe it even performed better than its predecessor at the box office, too. They both have weirdly shoe-horned family dynamics that are oddly resolved, or perhaps non-resolved. By many accounts WORLD should be just as good if not better than PARK -- so why does it fail so, so miserably?
I don't think JW did anything better than JP.
For one, the characters are largely ridiculous. Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard are likable enough, but the kids, the billionaire owner, the kids' parents, all of them are bland. Not interesting enough to cheer for or interesting enough to hate. The bad guys, BD Wong and Vincent D'Onofrio are not bad enough to really root against.
The military angle was ridiculous too. Dinosaurs would be shitty weapons in war. Riding along side the raptors was not inspiring or awesome, it was ridiculous.
Many of the plot devices were just ridiculous, including the idea that a dinosaur expert would lead people into a cage to look for a dinosaur that seemingly vanished out of thin air. They had cameras all over that enclosure, they didn't have any cameras that would show a massive animal climbing up and over? It wouldn't have been seen by anyone? You don't assume that the thermal sensors are somehow not working and instead assume this thing just got out?
They also made weird decisions, like having the assistant suffer arguably the worst death in the movie for what reason? In JP the lawyer suffered a pretty gruesome death, but there were reasons to dislike/hate him. The assistant had those kids thrust upon her and then they run away from her while she tries to find them. She gets butchered for that?
JW was a spectacle, but it was a boring story with shitty characters and lot of terrible moments.