The more closer to the original the better. Probably an o.c.d. thing, though for me to accept a repro I would want it to look and feel like an original as much as possible. So if the properties of the plastic are much closer and behave the same way then it's a true replica and ultimately looks the same plastic as the other figures original weapons. I own some of the older replica weapons, and whilst they are nice and sharp, they visibly stand out and feel like they are made from that Airfix model kit plastic. Also there's that sinking weapon stigma that would make me feel bad owning a repro. Knowing that it floats like an original is a satisfaction that would make me care less about owning an original.This has been beat to death but I feel like I have to respond here:
why does the reproduction have to be SOOOO idental that it floats and sounds the same while being dropped? That's where the line is drawn for many people for reproductions, why does there have to be a never ending arms race to get them to be indistinguishable from the original if the intent is not to deceive? If the blaster sounded different when dropped or sank in the water why would that bother you if it was only for your display enjoyment? do you regularly have all your blasters on display floating in a bowl of water?
Even though I aim to have at least one unique original weapon I have set a limit on how much I spend, so I could just settle for a repro if it was good enough. My concern with paying $100 and upwards for say a black palace blaster is if that value will stay the same or go down in future, because if you pay that sort of money then you have to treat it as an investment. I lost an original Leia blaster a couple of nights ago sorting through my figures. It was literally next to her on the floor and half hour later it completely disappeared!? I combed the carpet and nada! If I had paid $100 for it I would have felt very bad, though it's one I've had since I was a kid so accepted the loss better