Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
And EGG notably refers to the entire realism matter as "an absurd effort at best considering the topic!" while engaging the matter. His position is comparable to the position many of us here also have: it's an inherently absurd, futile effort. So it sounds as if EGG did not really think that realism was something that could be feasibly modeled in the game, and he even puts 'realistic' in quotes with a tinge of irony.
His position is not one that either you or [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]. Gygax came from Wargaming where realism meant get as close to reality as possible. Realism no longer means what he was talking about with that statement, and if you actually read 1e and 2e, he supports realism as it means today all over the place. Gygax with how he designed his games actually supports my position far more than he supports yours.
And what remains unresolved: how the frak do you objectively compare the modeling of realism between games? Let's imagine that all else being equal, what is more realistic? A D&D 5E that has its longsword do d8 damage or a D&D 5E that has its longsword do a d10 damage?
That's easy. It's d8. Size matters for damage in D&D, and d10 is for larger weapons than a longsword. Glaives, halberds, pikes, and heavy crossbows(which hit with more force than a longsword). So in the damage system that D&D has utilized since the early days, d8 is more realistic than d10 for longswords