It would depend upon many factors. Height restrictions are one of them. There are social, environmental, and engineering considerations on that front. Current land use practices are another. It may be possible to gain tremendous boosts in density even with mid-rise buildings. Then there are the diminishing returns to land use while building up since you are talking about many independent structures that require a certain amount of separation.
These buildings are by no means sprawling office parks. They are simply the realization that horizontal may be better than vertical in some cases.
Monoliths are problematic. They're dull, they're poorly connected, they're in the way. It's worse when they're arranged horizontally because people tend to move horizontally. When you build up, the problems mostly develop for the people inside your building. When you build across, you obstruct everyone around you.
How are these "landscrapers" different from sprawling office parks? The key difference I notice is that the plan doesn't include an ocean of parking (which admittedly is a big part of why office parks are terrible).
These buildings are by no means sprawling office parks. They are simply the realization that horizontal may be better than vertical in some cases.