God I love this non-argument. A game that has elves and dragons just can't have any realism!!!!
I believe it's more like this... The setting includes many many many many aspects that are unmoored from conventional human reality. The applicable genre is about things that diverge from conventional human reality.
Your use of conventional human reality as a basis for determining reasonableness of features, actions, whatever, has no inherent virtue. It's not more consistent or more logical. It's just a thing you can do. Where you allow it to constrain you, it's your own fault.
Yeah, basically this.
The game cannot be realistic because, quite literally, it
isn't real. It's openly
not conforming to the restrictions of reality. Bringing up those restrictions in some places and happily ignoring them in others just feels arbitrary and capricious.
Fictional things, regardless of their level of
realism, can still be
grounded however. That's what differentiates most "hard" sci-fi from "soft" sci-fi, for example, even though both things are usually unrealistic.
Gundam Wing is not striving for realism, because in reality there are no giant-mech pilots and it would be both extremely difficult and mostly pointless to construct such things. By introducing something unrealistic--Minovsky particles--however, the author was able to make a
grounded and
justified world that still managed to include things as unrealistic as Gundams. This is usually seen as being worthy of praise, as the Minovsky particles are a very minimal and narrowly-defined form of breaking from known reality, while still enabling all the fundamental story elements the author desired. The limits and applications of the particles are clear, and can't just be defied whenever one likes--they're not a free pass to do whatever you want. Similarly, stuff like Eezo and its titular Mass Effect are a very small change--just
one exotic material, and even tying it into current ideas in theoretical physics e.g. dark energy--but that enables all the classic sci-fi concepts (FTL communications and travel, "shields," levitation, fancy material construction, even psionics). Such conservation of detail while remaining grounded is well-appreciated.
The thing with groundedness is, all it requires is some effort. Most things can
become grounded; that's the reason we praise stuff like the above, where you employ minimal changes and don't break or ad-hoc modify the rules once they've been established. So the thing to look for, at least from where I'm sitting, is not "stuff that ought to be nerfed because it's
unrealistic," but rather "stuff that I want explained because I don't see what grounds it."