Not a lot to say that wasn't already said. Hell, I was even planning to cite books, a medium where skilled hands will use the lack of visual representation as an advantage. No, photo-realism, and the argument that we need it, is just going to make video games worse, and continue it down the path of ruining the potential video games have: to show us worlds that aren't possible, aren't realistic, but make us give a shit anyway, while making us a part of them.
No, that's not the most easily profitable way. No, that won't get all the instant gratification money prolific developers crave like their next drug fix. But the drive for the lowest common denominator does nothing for the industry as a whole, and for the people who stick around more than fifteen seconds in it, and no amount of bullshitting from the developers shooting for it can hide that that's all they're doing; they care nothing about improving video games. They're just after what they see as easy cash.
On a barely related note, Bioshock Infinite could use a lot less fucking cleavage, especially when your perspective is constantly looking downward at the character. Kind of funny how we're using it as an argument against cheap, shallow immersion when such an obvious hook as "LOOK, SHE HAS TITS. THINK YOU'LL STICK AROUND IF YOU GET TO STARE AT THEM THE WHOLE GAME?" is employed.