Okay...
A couple of friends and myself are making a video game with a battle system similar to a lot of tabletop RPG's.
The battle is pretty standard so far, but a little while ago, I had an idea that we think could be really cool- In addition to simulated battle, we want to create a simulated argument.

The mechanics would be the same as regular battle, with a couple of differences. Namely, everything taking place would be verbal, instead of physical. A character could potentially manipulate NPC's into getting what they want. Talking your way past the palace guard, via intimidation, bribery, or just plain manipulation would be some of the things possible to achieve with this system. I think it adds a touch of realism, and it's much more challenging than beating your way through the game, killing everything in your path.
To determine whether a battle is physical or verbal, we've developed a "hatred scale" which ranges from 0 (Engaging conversation) to 10 (I have sold my soul to Satan in exchange for the power to destroy you). Depending on where an opponent falls on this scale, determines how willing they are to talk to you.

Does this sound remotely interesting? Or are we just wasting a lot of time on a system nobody will enjoy?
I'd love to hear what people think about this

If you are looking to tabletop RPGs for sources of inspiration, you  might want to look at games like the Shadow of Yesterday, or Heroquest, where the exact same conflict mechanics can be used to settle an argument or a battle with swords.  Or Burning Wheel, which has more specialized (but related and interlinked) system for different arenas of conflict, such as arguing (Duel of Wits), archery duels (Range & Cover) or battling with swords (Fight!).

So in summary, something similar has certainly been done with success, and to great interest in the world of tabletop RPGs.