Here's the flaw with that argument. "Good and evil" are subjective (Things are more "grey" in reality). The goblins, while more violent, are also more ignorant. They're victims of their own fear and stupidity. Every kid to ever exist at that point (baring violence. Getting to that). [...] But hey, goblins are small even if adult sized. It's not hard to fit the pieces together. They're easy targets. Humans will pick on them. Take one look at them and go "Stabby stabby" on first sight. Why would a goblin ever be nice to a human if they're treated like that? They will learn to fear. They will learn to hate. They will learn to make targets because that is what they were taught. But just who teaches them?
Honestly, when you take into account we're creating the monsters, stabbing a blue little kid in the eye might be the least of peoples concerns. Btw, I also want the option of stabbing a blue little kid in the eye even if I would rather be diplomatic. Options are options. That's what it boils down too.
[...] P.S: Do that to an ice dragon in their own lair and no wonder they freeze you. That's defending your home after being threatened at that point. So I assure you, covering such events and reasons in a game does add to entertaint value while also getting people to consider their real selves (even if they don't realise they do it). The games that show "the ugly truth" are the ones that have helped make me a better person. [...] It also indicates "I'm afaid of having my game taken down if it's viewed as too extreme".
Let's cover entertainment value.
[...] I'm playing pathfinder: wrath of the rightous where characters have eyeballs removed and flesh eaten (not even joking. Love that it does that) but I can't stab a blue kid here? WOTR isn't getting taken down. [...]
The post is much too dense to respond to fully, so I will focus on this part.
If you believe casting a monster in a sympathetic light is in any way bold or new, you haven't been paying attention to entertainment for the past 30 years. "[Insert monster here] is actually misunderstood and a victim and the REAL aggressors are the humans" is about as stock a trope as it gets. It came about as a subversion of the "evil monster" trope, true, but it's been done so many times it became a generic trope unto itself.
Similarly, saying that humans can be monstrous is not some "ugly truth" or enlightened wisdom, it's something most people realize by the time they hit 15. If someone needs a game to make them realize that and look into themselves, I dare say they are extremely sheltered and have bigger problems than the way monsters are handled in fictional narratives.
None of this is controversial whatsoever. Gratuitous gore or sympathetic monsters or putting the blame on humans isn't going to get anything taken down, they've been entertainment staples for decades. On the contrary, I would argue that having an inherently, irredemably evil race is what's truly subversive in the current year. After all, this is why the lore is being changed in the first place. Because of social pressures. People say it's "bigoted" to have an evil race because they look for parallels where there are none, and so to avoid making this vocal minority mad, the idea of evil races is being done away with. Not some attempt to add depth. Not to make you ask questions. Pure peer pressure.
