Limit and NL are different games. There is no "better" or "worse." I like them both.
Yes, you can win a couple of buy-ins in NL -- but you can also lose a couple of buy-ins. Or more. You can lose a whole buy-in in one hand that you played completely correctly. You can lose your whole bankroll in minutes at a NL table.
I seldom lose a buy-in playing limit, but regularly double up. It can take awhile. It's a slower game, with many more adjustments in each hand you play. Precisely because it's hard to force a calling station out of the hand, you play them differently than you do someone who is likely to fold when he has missed. (And calling stations abound in limit -- just accept that. It's part of that game.) You are correct that it's tough to bully others in limit -- it's doable but not easy if they do not cooperate. It's a steadier game -- less risk, less quick gain. But a steady progress. It's less dramatic, more subtle. Less adrenaline, more thought. And when you get smashed on the river in a hand, you usually don't lose your stack and feel all tilty. There's something to be said for that.
How many times in NL would you have loved to stay in a hand with the nut flush draw or an open end straight, but the other person bet too much to make the call viable? Well, in limit, you can
do it -- which is why the range of hands is greater in limit. The pot odds
and implied odds let people hold on to drawing hands. And, if you have TPTK you need to take that into account. No use whining about it -- it's part of that game. It's seldom you get to the river without having considered what the other person might have (although I suppose some people do.) If you are worried about how the hand is going, you can slow down the betting in a way you only wish you could do in NL. (Unless you get squeezed -- but even then there is a cap on the betting.)
I was reading Negreanu's book on small ball (NL) poker and I think that, in great part, he has taken what he knows about limit and applied it to his NL game. He's a great limit player, but the big
money is in the NL tourneys. I see small ball as a way to make the sort of plays in NL that one does in limit.
And, BTW, tight play and semi-tight is still good in limit. It still pays off. But some people don't seem to get that -- which can make limit play rewarding. Why in the world would you complain about people who play sort of carelessly? No, you can't figure out what they have, but what they have is likely to be a worse hand than what you have. That's a nice situation to be in. Most of the time, you will win -- and the times they suck out, you don't have to lose much. It's not really a good game for LAGs -- although, at some tables, for a little while, a LAG can do well. It depends.