That was never the test
Useful tests are under controlled conditions. A particular set of ambient temperatures and pressures etc.
The regulations do not and never can specify "real world" results.
They only specify results under a particular range of conditions.
The regulations specifically allow manufacturers to have higher emissions when cold etc.
Yes, it would be better if the test covered more sets of conditions. It didn't.
But nobody else actually changed how their engines ran based on whether they were actively being tested.
There have been a lot of really shitty articles about this.
It is meaningless to compare the emissions in unknown conditions to the emissions in specified conditions.
That's like saying Bolt is a terrible sprinter because he can't run 100m in 10sec, without mentioning that it was at 10,000m altitude. Of course he bloody can't!