Elmofongo: Yes, because RPG elements reduces gameplay to numbers and stats then kinetic skill
morolf: Depends what you understand by rpg elements, people above have mentioned Stalker...you can do quests there, have an inventory, can upgrade weapons and armour (at least in Clear Sky and Call of Pripyat), but there's no skill system. Firefights still depend on your skill as a player, not on some behind the scenes dice rolling.
In Stalker CS and CoP, do you also start with a gun that has a hard time hitting the broadside of a barn at point blank range?
kalirion: RPG elements make everything better IMO.
dtgreene: Except competitive multiplayer; there is no good reason to give a player who has played longer a mechanical advantage over one that hasn't. Also, there are some types of games where RPG elements would be hard or impossible to implement, like puzzle games (how would you add RPG elements to something like Tetris or Sokoban without it feeling contrived). There's also the fact that adding RPG elements to a game makes it much harder to balance, as you need to predict how powerful a player is at each part of the game; if you mispredict, the game becomes either trivial or frustratingly difficult (perhaps forcing the player to spend hours earning XP).
So no, there are some places where RPG elements don't belong.
Agreed on persistent stats in competitive multiplayer, however RPG elements within a match very much have their place - just look at MOBAs.
I don't see why it would be that much harder to add RPG elements to Tetris than it is to match 3 games.
RPG Elements in Tetris. With a bit more work, could've become a full blown Tetris Quest.