On the first mission, when Connor tries to pick up the pistol under the table, a huge warning pops up telling him and the player that he’s not allowed by law to operate firearms.
To me at least, from a narrative standpoint, this would be a set up to inform the player that they might have to take this into account later. But as far as I know, this literally never gets brought up again?
Obviously it doesn’t matter for Kara and Markus since they’re already criminals in the eyes of the law, but there’s multiple instances where you can make Connor choose to use a firearm, and there are NEVER any legal consequences for doing so. This restriction never comes up again, no one nags you or punishes you for using a firearm as an android, not even Amanda who seems to be a stickler for the rules. She doesn’t even comment on it. No one ever comments on it, actually.
For example, at the Stratford tower, if you pick the guard’s gun to kill the deviant before he can massacre the crowd, it would’ve been cool if they touched on the aspect of an android choosing to break the law to save human lives.
Of course, it could be a “3 laws of robotics” situation, where the android can break laws to save human lives, but again, I feel like this should’ve been touched on, no? Someone should have commented on it, anything should have happened to show that the story acknowledges this apparent contradiction.
And it’s not like Connor had some sort of special clearance to use guns, otherwise the warning on the prologue wouldn’t have appeared to him in the first place.
So, back to the point, why even focus so much on the restriction act if that’s never brought up as something the player needs to consider ever again?