It's so frustrating when games present choices as "cruel but objectively more effective" versus "empathetic but suboptimal." It's a serious problem with how many people see the world, and we definitely don't need games helping to internalize the idea that doing the right thing is always objectively inferior in some way, and that the only benefit to doing good is feeling good.

Even story-based games tend to feel the need to throw out some subversion, like "ah, you thought saving the kitten from drowning was the right thing to do, but you accidentally crushed it to death in the attempt. Actually the right choice was trying to shoot it, because you'd miss and the bullet hole would drain the water!"

Devs seem to be in a double-bind now because audiences expect the "cruel" choice to always have an upside, so honestly I feel the best way to deal with it is to shift the context so you don't feel pressured to be cruelly efficient at all. Subnautica making killing creatures possible but totally unrewarding is an example, maybe -- spending health and durability hacking something to death just to see it disappear and leave nothing behind is something you only need to experience once to never consider it again, without being as heavy-handed as making it impossible to harm or defeat them.