If someone managed to create a game which manages to combine both these two, I will be his or her greatest supporter, but none has managed to come anywhere close. We simply have to look at reality the way it stands today.
Reality is that YOU think that written text representing something happening, is actually superior to having it displayed on screen - with the limitations that represents - now or in the potential future.
Personally, I think written text is as far removed from something actually happening as it can get in a game.
I can't get excited by that, really.
You're saying that because you can WRITE anything, anything can happen - and as such, that's better.
That's fine, but it's really only your opinion.
I LARGELY prefer having things displayed and audible, with as many as my senses engaged as possible - where it makes sense. So, something for the eyes and ears - to make my sense of immersion as powerful as it can get.
Now, WITHIN that kind of gaming environment - I'd like as much freedom as possible.
If I had to choose between a completely static and totally linear environment, with absolutely no freedom as a player, THEN I'd agree with you - and I would prefer text-based games. But that's not what games are like, and there are many multiplayer games that have enough of what I want, to completely undermine the value of text-based freedom. Especially when you consider that in any modern multiplayer game, there is the possibility of text-input and voice chat. You could basically supplement with every bit of imagined reality as you wish, simply by saying "/me does X" or "X happens" - and you'd have the advantage of that which you so crave.
Games like Neverwinter Nights or Lord of the Rings Online do A LOT to create a roleplaying environment, and your rigid and stubborn insistence on pure text is something you will have to accept as purely subjective, if you want to understand where other players are coming from.