The notion of a ‘good’ or ‘evil’ path doesn’t work for me – a quality writer doesn’t view the world in such simple terms, and should be able to take everyone’s side, equally, and not weigh in with their own trite view of what’s good and what isn’t. No sentient being is so stupid as to think they’re ‘evil’. That kind of thing is best left to the realm of cartoon villains.
It’s worrying, frankly, that the good/evil paths are so cartoonish-ly pronounced in this game, each so vividly sign-posted that they might as well be good and evil tags in the dialogue. With Minthara’s speech, there’s no question about the direction in which you’re heading, and so it’s no wonder the data says it’s the least trodden road, because if there’s no mystery, there’s no intrigue – aka boring.
I agree that the good and evil paths in this game are very clearly signposted and the evil path is quite cartoonish in a lot of ways, but I want to disagree with your assertion that a quality writer doesn't weigh in with their own view of what's good or evil. Unless they're writing about facts, an author's view of right and wrong implicitly colors any work. And there are always good guys and bad guys. I mean, look at lord of the rings, the well from which modern fantasy sprung. The villain is literally called the Dark Lord and their base is called Mount Doom. Sauron and his forces are as on the nose evil as it gets. In Mass Effect, Cerberus are clearly meant to be vilanous to some degree, even if they're on you're side in the second game. Villains are clear and present in Shakespeare's works, the list goes on. Sure, you can understand the villains, you can sympathize with them, but more often than not, it's clear who the heroes and villains are simple because in a story we're following the heroes. It's very rare that we're really supposed to wonder if the protagonist is morally in the wrong broadly. If they are in the wrong, then usually part of their development is realizing this fact and changing.
But that's in general. If you're talking about just in RPGs like this, that is a bit different and a more neutral approach can be affected. But even then, just because they believe they're the hero of their own story doesn't mean anyone else is going to agree with them.I look at Pillars of Eternity for an example. Spoilers incomoning for the game.
You're able to agree with the Leaden Key by the end of it, and accept their motives and even join up with their goddess. But I would argue that even then, the game doesn't shy away from demonstrating that they're pretty evil. They murder an entire section of a city for their goals, and that's not the worst thing they've done. The question isn't "are they evil," the question i "are they necessary evil?"
Another great example is Dragon Age, with the the mage-templar conflict and the treatment of elves. The games, particularly 2, do try to show the best and worst of both sides, and present each side's best cases. But even when presented objectively, the Templar order is fundamentally cruel and inhumane regardless of the best intentions of their best members. And not all their members are even close to best intentions. And where elves are concerned, there are times you can side with the humans against them, but the game never shys away from making it clear you are siding with racists against an already oppressed class of people.
