It's not really about "my way", there's a lot of people that really care about finally having a game where shotguns just behave "real" for once. It's been a very frustrating issue for many years in video games. This issue isn't really special or exclusive to myself, since many people have been complaining about it for a long time, and we're always ignored. (not pointing any fingers at anyone, just saying generally in history) Please read my previous post directly before you post, I did some better explaining. I also clarify, I love a good challenge, but do not love obvious and cheap limitations that say to me "no fun allowed".With respect.....how many games does that even leave? You can forget strategy games like XCOM for starters. The shotgun in that game? Incredibly short ranged. Versus fighters introduce advantages and drawbacks for characters too. Dark Souls has high damage 2 handed weapons but they're often slow and harder to use.
I'm playing Ghosts of Tsushima at the moment and I can use Heavenly Strike, which is cool, but guess what? It costs an energy (resolve) point. Thing is, if I only have 3 points and I want to use that ability then I'll be left with 2 and I won't be able to use my Revive power if I need it because that needs 3. Damn drawbacks spoiling my fun!
In that last bit you say something that kind of sums up this whole discussion. Limitations and drawbacks are inconvenient and annoying.....to you. But that doesn't mean they're annoying to everyone and in the end CDPR are making a game, doing what they feel works best and hoping to please as many players as possible. Role-playing games often use the strengths and weaknesses system for classes, abilities and weapons to give characters purpose and identity. CP pen & paper might make most guns lethal and more realistic but this is a video-game, and one of the biggest releases this generation to boot. It's gonna have (presumably) a different take. How much I don't know.
Assuming weapons even have distinct pros and cons (I'm not sure how much of a feature that really is yet) then all that matters is how many people enjoy that compared to how many don't. I think the smart-gun has already been said to auto-aim BUT the drawback is that the bullets are slower and do less damage. Are you ok with that? Maybe because it's a sci-fi weapon?
The only differences you seem to want are that all weapons are good and deadly but that, on occasion, some will be even better. I'm with RestlessDingo32 in this regard; that design doesn't seem that interesting to me. It's not bad, I just prefer the other style more.
Again, how many people find it discomforting and how many find it an enjoyable design choice?
I wouldn't feel forced or unhappy, I'd feel challenged.
Also, depending on how many weapons the character can take, how do you know they'll even be able to swap out that shotgun? If you can only take one sidearm and one long-gun then the shotgun player won't be able to swap out easily. So they'll be stuck with the shotgun. If the guns were balanced as you desire then guess what? It's not a problem, they'll be very effective anyway. So now the interesting bits of players choice of weapon and planning are kinda redundant. You see what I'm getting at?
In the end, I get the impression you're suggesting that your way of things leaves everyone happy but I doubt it's as simple as that given different people's tastes.
I hope that clears things up a bit