As long as the dilemma choice isn't as obvious as in this example, it's fine.
I'd prefer a constant evaluation of the player's actions anyway...
Yes, it shouldn't always be obvious.
And when it isn't obvious, and afterwards you noticed you actually made the wrong choice, I would like to see that you can still make it better, maybe not always how it should have could ended in the best way, but still, you have payed your dues.
Like someone ask you to kill someone,
lets's say, Ray says: "ooh, that Charles guy, killed my daughter, my lovely Kimberly.", and then you say, "i'll make him pay, and get you your revenge."
So, of you go and killing charles. job done, but then you get to know that actually Ray didn't have a daughter etc, and that he actually set you up, for example. He wanted to get rid of Charles because he still owned him some money but Ray didn't want his hands get covered in blood, and thus didn't want to kill Charles himself.
So, then you decide to kill Ray to let him pay for his evil doings.
So in the ending you killed both Ray and Charles, but somehow your back in neutral, maybe even bit positive, since in the time of the killing you always tought both were evil.
