Low scoring close contests are (at least to my mind) more satisfying than high scoring close contests as one knows for certain that every single run is vital rather than becoming blase when another six is hit. It also makes the game more one of attack and defence for both batsmen and bowlers rather than simply of defence for the fielding side.Speaking of really great high scoring ODIs, just had a dream about an alternate reality World Cup group stage game between England and New Zealand.
England bat and get skittled out for 62 (or 82, couldn't read it well in the dream). In response New Zealand are only able to post 61 (or 81), due to what most certainly must have been an epic England bowling performance.
The media immediately afterwards hail it as the greatest ODI of all time.
While one could fairly argue that in a low scoring match the bowlers are unfairly favoured, just as the batsmen in a high scoring match, a low scorer remains inherently more interesting as wickets are finite while runs are (at least in theory) infinite.