YES, the pause option is totally unrealistic because time to make optimal decisions is exactly what you don't have in a real firefight. But many people don't have the ability to react under fire an/or the reflexes to do so. Do you really want to tell them "you can't play this RPG because you're not a good at shooter games"?
Nope, I don't think this at all. An on-demand pause function as an option for the reasons you just mentioned would be fine. I'd rather it not be forced into the game play though. It's implied a pause option isn't forced but it might not be a safe assumption.
If, on the other hand, they want to make the best RPG they can, they shouldn’t shy away from design that leans heavily away from shooter gameplay, and design the RPG mechanics to be as strong as possible.
Fair enough. I don't consider real-time game play shooter game play though. Shooter combat to me means the player has absolute control, independent of the character strengths, weaknesses and abilities. Success and failure in combat is reduced completely down to player ability. Shooter game play tends to feature limited story and character development considerations, and focuses on combat against a plethora of opponents almost exclusively. I'm still under the impression CDPR is intending to provide an RPG. The question is whether the combat is going to be completely player driven or character driven. If it's the former CP is yet another RPG/FPS hybrid attempt.
As long as the choices going into the character progression and development appropriately impact the player in combat it would suffice as RPG combat IMO. If the character cannot shoot, hack or engineer well the player cannot either. Turn based is more of a style to a game genre. There are real-time and turn based strategy games, for instance. Both of these are strategy games.
Systems involving thaco, dice rolls, hit/miss/critical chance, etc. are one way to make the player ability in line with that of the character. It's not the only way to do it. Just because old school RPG's used these mechanisms doesn't make it RPG combat. They're just the means to get there.
Going back to W3... I'd consider the combat at least somewhat in line with RPG combat mechanics. If I change my character build it will completely alter the way I should approach combat. In other words, my character progression choices heavily dictate where I, as the player, end up strong or weak in combat. Now yes, this wouldn't be the case if I mindlessly ran into combat to button spam my attack button, while chugging potions/food to stay afloat. I don't do this because it's the definition of how to do W3 combat wrong.
I don't see why a similar setup cannot work for CP. Real-time, highly lethal, heavily character driven combat.
If someone prefers turn based or the way older RPG's decided to approach combat it is perfectly fine. I'd rather not classify these systems as RPG combat just because it's the way specific games in the RPG genre decided to approach it though. It doesn't seem fair.
) enemies to take down a player, a hobo with a shotgun is well enough (Someone said Battlezone?
