Otherwise just off the top of my head we’ve had Dishonored 1/2, Prey, Alien Isolation, Arkham games, XCom1/2 -all of which are, even on the Codex, largely considered to be pretty good to great, and I’m sure there are others I’m forgetting.
None of these are ...great, though. At least uncompromisingly good. I haven't played Prey, but Dishonored 1 and 2 suffer from story issues and badly balanced playstyles (I applaud their level design though, truly great), Alien Isolation also doesn't have a compelling narrative and I found it rather boring tbh, the Arkham games are
severely overrated, the X-Coms are but a pale imitation of the originals and they introduced the silly cover mechanics that plague us still. Dishonored 1 and 2 are the best of these.
You should play Prey, which is easily the best of the games I listed imo, especially if your favorites of the ones you've played were the Dishonoreds. Prey does pretty much everything the Dishonored games did better,
with the notable exception of level design, which as you noted is pretty sublime at parts in Dishonored 1/2. That's not to say it's bad in Prey, but it's not up to the standard set by Dishonored. If you do play Prey, I would recommend using RoSoDude's mod, which significantly increases the challenges of resource management and the tradeoffs of character development (and, incidentally, I believe brings it much closer in line with Raph Colantonio's original vision for the game before the Zenimax suits got their hands on it).
As for the rest of your post... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ de gustibus I guess. I like the Arkham games well enough and think they're popamole done right, but I have always been surprised how well-liked they are on the Codex. I also agree that XCOM is inferior to X-Com as a series, but I find the implication that X-Com qualifies as AAA dubious; it was certainly fairly high-profile for the time, but the team-sizes, budgets, and the market in general was a lot smaller back then. There's no way X-Com would have been profitable if it had been given the budget of XCOM, even accounting for inflation. I would argue the idea of AAA games didn't really exist until the late 90s; 3d tech was becoming more commonplace and bigger companies like Microsoft, Sony,and Warner Brothers were starting to take note of the success of franchises from Blizzard, Valve, and EA Sports, and those new players pumped a huge amount of cash into the industry and ballooned budgets up to what we know think of as AAA.
Hmm, sort of lost my train of thought there. Oh well. I guess what I'm getting at is that when you say "none of those games are great" (which, ah, *pedant alert* I do feel compelled to point out that your initial claim was that there have been no "good" AAA games) my response is sort of just... Well... yeah? They're AAA games.
They've always been "good" at best. They're designed to appeal to the broadest possible base, and are always going to compromise on vision and design in some way. Prey's difficulty and balance got completely gutted. Dishonored 1 and 2 have, as evidenced by the world-building and lorebooks, pretty competent writers forced to write the most banal boring plots ever. This is nothing new though. Call of Duty single-handedly dumbed down the FPS genre, and before that Half-Life single-handedly erased the run'n'gun shooter for the next decade and a half. None of that isn't to say that there aren't occasional "good" AAA games put out.