Wow, I love RPGWatch, but you guys are pricks.
Two things:
1. The Mass Effect series has always been upfront about the fact that the battles involve shooting. Sure, maybe Bioware was known for more typical RPG romps, but I don't see why that precludes them from doing another variation on the same genre.
2. Why does the fact that Mass Effect depends on shooting mean it "isn't an RPG"? There is a LOT of variance between RPGs in terms of battle systems. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that there ISN'T a standard RPG battle system. Turn-based, real-time, first person, third person, isometic over the top, true blue over the top, action based, strategy based, automatic, instantaneous, random, etc. etc. etc. - there is a classic RPG for basically every genre. The Elder Scrolls games are first person and action based? THEY CAN'T BE RPGS! Divinity II doesn't have a party?! And it's action based! NOT AN RPG! Pool of Radiance is more turn based strategy than typical turn based RPG? MUST NOT BE AN RPG!
RPGs are about two things: 1. Progression - you get stronger as you play, you get better equipment, you get more allies, you get more abilities, etc. 2. Living in the world - talking with people, making important decisions, recruiting allies and friends, doing quests for allies and friends, etc. etc.
Mass Effect 1 AND 2 have both of these elements. I wish that the progression elements in Mass Effect 2 were a bit more important, but you spend more time talking to people than shooting.
Listen, just because you aren't a big fan of a game, doesn't mean that it isn't an RPG and doesn't mean that it is a "bad game."