Then, what would you say to someone who infers that Undertale's narrative comes across as more of a lecture than a question?
Because Undertale, as a game, was centered around asking why people enjoy violent RPGs, but that narrative never left any room for people to actually answer that question in-universe.
Questions are meant to encourage ideas, interpretations and dialogue.
Undertale's narrative, on the other hand, makes an assertion delivered through the many voices of the characters, especially Flowey, the Fallen Child and Sans.
These characters love to ramble on and on about player motivations and 'perverted sentimentality,' but there's no real weight to any of it because the player never has an opportunity to question or challenge any of the characters in turn. There is no room for dialogue in-universe.
There is the choice of fighting or mercy, but those choices don't have weight because they both factor into a single, specific narrative that didn't allow anyone to actually engage with it.
Questioning the audience's love of violent entertainment without allowing anyone to question the narrative, the man who created it, or the people who keep praising it... it's questionable and dubious at best. And considering what the community did with that narrative, such as shaming and guilt-tripping Let's Players who wanted to play blind (Markiplier and Mangaminx), regardless of which choices where made (such as giving Sans a funny accent)...
"A game with one choice is no different than a game with two choices, or a game with ten thousand million choices, because these choices function as part of a larger system, and a system cannot help but make claims."