I wouldn't say it went over my head. I already knew about Lisa The Boy Scout going for something similar (though I haven't seen that one), and right from the re-animation of Marge vs. The Monorail, I pretty much knew what I was in for. However, just because I got the idea of the premise doesn't mean I think it was welldone. The references still didn't help actually building a suspenseful or engaging story, and felt more just like forced and annoying fan service.
Well, I didn't say that the satire and deconstruction of the show and it's legacy went over your head specifically, but there seem to be a lot of instances with fans that don't see anything below the surface and only see the fanservice and references to various past episodes & classic moments, not to mention the very overt metafictional aspects (something the show has explored much as of recently, for instance in the very much recommended 'Lisa The Boy Scout', which all the more comes off as a non-'Treehouse' version of the 'Simpsons World' segment. I definitely think it's worth seeing at least once as it is one of the more interesting episodes the've done in a while).
Like I've said before, I do think it is easy to miss the subtext and misinterpret the episode as another reference-fest, and to be perfectly honest, I do get a bit of that feeling from you. I don't blame you or anyone else who didn't like it as there is a lot of overt references and callbacks, but even though you personally didn't find the references to be done well nor helped the story in particular, there is still a satirical. deconstructive story there (and which clearly has engaged a lot of fans). I wouldn't call it "forced and annoying fan service" as to me, it feels almost like skirting close to not understanding what they were going for (I really felt it wasn't just some circlejerk).
The monorail bit alone basically consists of two guys raving about how funny Marge vs. The Monorail is, and later on we get a group of people trying to force Homer to recreate the bush scene from Homer Loves Flanders again. It's a celebratory showcase of the show's legacy without any real satire of clever commentary to go along with it, and the few attempts that are there still feel "mechanical" if you pardon the pun. I chuckled at the army of Ralph robots going "I choo-choo-choose you" since that actually took an old joke and turned it on its head, but other than that it largely felt like the references and celebration of those references themselves was the joke.
I think those are all examples of the episode really going for the metafictional and overtly (almost cloyingly) so, but they are still in service for the story's obvious satirical take on the legacy of the show and how far things have gone in the future that the show takes place in. To me, it feels like it shows a version of our world where the Simpsons is a behemoth even larger than what we have today in real-life and it makes sense that in the 45+ seasons there's been in-universe (according to Lisa's lament) there's be obsessive and annoying fans who care only for the classic episodes, lines & memes and force the robots to do these over and over (I think the hedge meme bit does that, but turns it on its head with Homer refusing and killing the obnoxious fans by shoving them inside the hedge instead).
I saw a lot of the satirical humor with those fans (such as them raving about 'Marge Vs. The Monorail' and forcing Homer to drink beer as in "LOL, wouldn't it be funny if he was the conductor and drunk of his ass?!" as actively poking fun at the more unbearable superfan parts of the fan base (and also jabs at those who like the show mainly because of the memes). I saw a lot of commentary on the state of the show and a nightmare scenario of it and its legacy and state as an intellectual property having been taken way too far. An interactive park with robots that are all about re-enacting classic episodes and situations will naturally indulge in this cavalcade of references, fan service and memes (& it felt perfect to use the Westworld parody for this alternate universe story).
It wasn't just referencing for the sake of it as there was a point there, but some might not see it as well as myself and others do. You may not like the jokes and feel it's all referential back-patting bullcrap that's there for the sake of having a reference-heavy story, but the punchline and reasons of being a self-desconstructive and bitingly satirical segment felt rather clear to me. Yeah, like I said I don't blame anyone for not seeing it (especially those tired of all the meta & self-referential stuff the show likes to do these days) but I (and I suppose others too) can still see there's more beneath the surface of the episode's reference-fest.
'Behind The Laughter' (which you cite as a comparison) does something very similar (and is a standout), but I think they are still different enough to not be an apt direct comparison: 'Behind The Laughter' shows the family as struggling flesh & blood actors in the show and is a parody of the VH1 'Behind The Music' documentary series, while 'Simpsons World' goes for a real-life-type perspective with 'The Simpsons' being a very popular TV series, a merchandising juggernaut with a vast legacy that led to the creation the amusement park based on the characters and their various exploits, leading to the Simpson robots gaining sentience so obviously there'd be a ton of blatant references and riffing, but I felt it's all well in-context and tongue in cheek, going all out with the silliness & taking advantage of the 'Westworld' parody. It manages to celebrate the series while at the same time poking fun at its ridiculous longevity & fanbase. The reference-based humor adds to the whole existential horror approach and that, to me, helps with the weird absurdist tone.
At the end of the day, I think it more or less boils down to apples & oranges with what of metatextual approach one prefers. Also, some just don't find the metafictional take with all the references & cameos from characters entertaining & that can be a hard sell, even despite the fact that there is a satirical and deconstructive subtext in there (even though it generally is simpler than both 'Boy Scout' & 'Behind The Laugher). It depends on the person and how accepting they are of a barrage of references, nostalgia and more of that ilk (such those that can get a little too real-life for comfort; for instance). Sometimes you have to look a little closer to see the overall meaning and that there is, in fact, points to the heavily referential approach, but that doesn't mean it will work for all and I get that. Doing a reference-heavy story definitely won't work for all viewers and like I've said before, the satire will be hard to spot to some.