What I mean is it's easy to implement effects that basically just make the camera blurrier and make the lighting over-saturated + a fish eye lens resulting in segments that look more "realistic", hard to make these type of effects actually look good in a game consistently.
The last Homefront game made by Crytek made an attempt at doing some of this kind of stuff, mostly the over-saturation. One of the issues with doing this in games is that lighting levels are very different outdoor vs indoor, and in real life it's not the camera but our eyes that adjust to compensate for that. What they did in Homefront was try to emulate the way our eyes adjust for brightness by having the camera adjust the brightness level drastically whenever the player went through a door that went from indoors to outdoors or vice versa. The effect was perhaps a little more realistic, but very annoying in gameplay. Other games often do something similar, but not to the extent that Homefront tried it.
Even when done much better like in the case of Unrecorded, it raises a lot of gameplay issues. While it looks cool at first, I think most people would quickly get annoyed by playing a game that only looks realistic because the camera basically makes everything look less visible. In the first video in OP, there are a lot of lighting issues. The interior walls of the building are basically black, which isn't realistic as far as what real life would look like and is only realistic in terms of how a video would look from a crappy camera. The tires on the truck outdoors are also extremely dark. If a game looked like this on its own without the intended camera effects, people would think it was bugged.
It's basically The Blair Witch Project effect.