Balancing violence with non-violence.

So there seems to be two teams, one advocating non-lethal solutions to everything, and others who want their dang spear guns. I think there is a simple solution to this debate: Allow the violence, but discourage it through other gameplay mechanics.

For example, in the real world sharks can "smell" blood in the water from a considerable distance and will home in on it in very short order. Simply add this mechanic to the game's own predators and you have an effective deterrent to people going crazy with the weapons - because using them will only draw in more predators to the area. Spearing a Stalker may be easier (and more permanent) than simply stunning it with a cattle prod (note to devs: add a cattle prod that works on heat instead of raw electricity), but as soon as it goes belly-up then whatever eats Stalkers is going to come sniffing around pretty quick. The next thing you know you've got a swarm of Sand Sharks (not even native to this biome!) zooming in the feast on the dead Stalker, along with anything else edible nearby (read: the player).

The second mitigating factor is disrupting the ecosystem. Removing enough of one type of animal simply opens the door for other types to appear. This would be a bit more of a dynamic game mechanic change, as it would mean that the player could actually affect what creatures spawn (or how often they spawn) in any given biome. Sure, you could wipe all the Sand Sharks from an area, but what will take their place? Spine Eels? Not exactly an improvement.

The third factor would simply be ammunition in itself. Non-lethal weapons would tend to be energy using weapons: Sonics, thermal shifters, wave projectors, etc. Lethal weapons would be on the side of solid mass projectile weapons. That means that your lethal weapons would require scavenging for resources to feed them forever. Your non-lethal energy using counterparts, on the other hand, just need to have their batteries plugged back into the charger when you're done (or just wear Charge Fins). Thus the non-lethal weapons become far easier to use and maintain over the long run, whilst their lethal counterparts forever remain a chore to keep operating.

The forth factor would be to scale the aggression of the animal behavior based on the player's actions. Meaning that lethal force weapons would garner a far more violent response from the animals as well. For example, if a Sea Tender is in the way and the player prods it with their cattle prod or tosses a fish repelling stink bomb into the area, well then the critter will just huff and go somewhere else. But if they shoot at it with a spear gun or try to stab it with a knife then it will freak out, try to kill the player, and probably chase them a good ways for good measure. So your non-lethal weapons would scare creatures away & make them stop bothering you, while you're lethal weapons would initiate a combat response. When dealing with swarming creatures, that could prove very bad.

The fifth factor should be part of an overall arching ecosystem tweak, and would affect passive creatures as well. Simply put, over harvesting should reduce spawns. Meaning if someone just hangs out in one area and hunts all the little fish for meals then don't be surprised when fewer fish spawn there tomorrow. The player could either develop a migratory attitude towards hunting or they could bring farming in as a solution. After all, what is the real point of External Growbeds beside decoration? With an ecosystem update they could have an actual purpose: fish food. Just as bee keeper intentionally create gardens that are more appealing to bees, the player could correlate what plants seem to attract which passive fish and then cultivate those plants via farming to attract more of that fish type.

That last factor could, again with an enhanced ecosystem update, be the ultimate in non-lethal defense techniques. How? You don't see many predators going after Gasopods, do you? By cultivating flora that attracts defensive animals (and by adding more types of them) the player can alter the local environment to be one that simply discourages predators from even entering the area to begin with. Then simply add a mechanic wherein the longer a player goes without doing anything to provoke said defensive animals the less they feel threatened by the player (meaning once the Gasopods come to realize that you're not a predator and you're feeding them, they'll stop farting poison around you.)

At any rate, the point here is that are plenty of ways to balance the violence vs non-violent solutions that don't involve anyone saying "just because." The option to try to play the mighty hunter trying to rid the planet of Reapers is still there for anyone who wants to try, but it's also made plainly clear that doing so probably isn't the wisest choice of action. Simply trying to murder your way to success would always have consequences, and none of them good. The non-violent options aren't forced on anyone, but they are clearly made to be more efficient & cause less problems overall.