If you do consider aquascaping, then think very carefully. Most of the examples you see will be "high tech", with advanced lighting, carbon dioxide addition, lots of specific fertilisers - and lots of work, for ever! Some of these people literally trim their plants every day or so. A well-maintained aquascape can look great, but a neglected one would not only look ugly but would probably be a poor environment for fish. It's something for the dedicated enthusiast.
I can draw a parallel with gardening. Many people admire the white garden at Sissinghurst and try to do the same at home, then wonder why their effort looks a mess. What they don't understand is that to keep the Sissinghurst garden looking good for visitors, every morning a team of gardeners go out at 6 a.m. and cut off every dead and dying flower, and literally arrange and tie all of the plants into perfect position. Of course, most people have neither the time nor inclination to do this at home and hence their gardens are full of brown dead and collapsing flowers, as someone said "more like dirty washing than fresh white linen". Aquascaping is a bit like this, it needs constant attention to look good, a major commitment.
Incidentally, aquascaping is not intended to produce a natural-looking underwater scene, quite the opposite. The idea is to produce something that looks like a miniature landscape, with rolling hills, green fields etc., totally unrealistic.