[Taste I wouldn't say like that, because taste is individual. I agree with you on "loveless," but that certainly has financial reasons as well. Every detail has to be paid for. Since the dressing room, pantry, and children's bathroom already consume the cost per square meter, there isn't much left for the exterior ;) I don't think anyone regrets today's building style: times change and the era of butzen windows and the like is over. Today's time is characterized by climate protection and energy transition – large windows and affordable structure. That doesn't mean these houses lose their justification for existence. They are eye-catchers where they stand – just like the old sideboard in the modern bathroom or elsewhere the antique table in the modern living room. Contrasts and highlights, an occasional stylistic break – that's what the world lives on :)]
If you look at architectural history, you see that certain aesthetic elements persisted and repeatedly returned over centuries. I only mention symmetry, proportions, the golden ratio. The entire neo-movement (classic, neo-renaissance, neo-baroque, etc.) did not come about without reason. Even the original Bauhaus style rests on classicism, only that in Bauhaus "unnecessary" elements were omitted or altered for reasons of functionality, simplification, and cost reduction. But the original Bauhaus is classicist. What is marketed today as Bauhaus is actually an eyesore. Five differently sized windows on one house, arbitrarily placed windows in the facade (so that the light in the room is right), huge windows without divisions... that’s something else than beautiful. If only symmetry would at least be considered! Everything symmetrical flatters the eye, whether in a pretty face, interior decoration, or architecture. Strangely, most architects of modern/Bauhaus style houses live in old buildings or Gründerzeit villas. Cube construction and bungalows were originally due to cost savings and have now metastasized like cancer with more and more spread.