It's hardly your place to say such a thing, is it? Several people have commented that they like the fact that it doesn't force you to drop everything else in order to play. In any case, you can go make a sandwich in the middle of the boss fight in every game ever made. You just press the "pause" button, and go do whatever. If a game can't hold your attention in the middle of the final battle, then it's the fault of the game, not the format. You may as well say that "this house is badly built, and will probably fall down if you breathe at it too hard. Therefore, bricks are a poor and inefficient building material."
You play a few games with a turn-based battle system, don't like them, and assume that there's nothing more to the format? The hell? How did it ever cross your mind that such a thing would be at all sensible? If you'd slimmed down your criteria, then you'd have a better chance at not sounding silly. "Turn based games have no strategy" is negated quickly and easily by the mere existence of Golden Sun.
Anyway, I get what you meant, however badly phrased it was. Basic enemies can be dispatched quickly and easily by using your simple attacks, and occasionally healing. Guess what? Basic troops in COD4 can be killed by shooting them in the chest a couple times, and using cover! Oh my lord! COD4 must be crap! Of course not. There's a hell of a lot more to turn-based RPGs than "tapping A", and you know it. When you get past the point where basic attacks are all you have, and your characters start learning new abilities - as well as facing stronger foes - that's when it starts getting interesting. You have to take into account the attack speeds of different characters, figure out when and how often you can heal, decide whether to use this mid-power attack now, or that high power attack later...
Look, not liking something is fine. I don't care what you want to play. Just don't try to make it look like it's anything more than opinion.
