A question that needs to be answered by authors of all kinds of fiction, regardless if books, movies, games or mods, is that of explanation. Explanation seems to serve a simple purpose: Allowing the consumer of whatever story to understand motives of heroes and villains and the inner workings of the world.
However when trying to explain the situation it can seriously backfire. A classical example are "Bond Villain Expositions", not only explaining the plan, but also the whole psyche of the villain in question. Let's just say not all people like this kind of thing. On the one hand it shoehorns people into simple roles (and making them look stupid), on the other hand it removes a lot of mystery and "coolness" of the villain in question.
And it doesn't only apply to villains, which I only used as an example. It can also apply to the world (explaining how this and this works and came to be), to heroes (why does he do this and this), and more.
Now however not explaining critical aspects is also wrong, because it will confuse. The opposite of complete explanation is imho ambiguous explanation. Which are subjective and often conflicting with other subjective explanations also given. So you need to make up your own mind. So it's an explanation, which doesn't reveal everything. An example for this are the different origin myths in the Elder Scrolls world.
Problem is, some people don't like this either, because it often (if done right) doesn't offer a true solution. And if done wrong, it can get really confusing. Or look artificial. That happens if you try to make something look not "black & white" in moral terms, but then merely obfuscate the sides (or choices) a bit, without adding true colors (or more than very light shades of gray) to them.
As a modder (or writer, or whatever) I don't think there is an optimal solution. It all comes down to taste. So my question here is, which do you prefer? As creator, and as consumer?