Again, more good news. You can say during your session 0 "my orcs are different". On the other hand I can have "standard" orcs but then subvert the trope if I want to.
I haven't done that for orcs yet because I don't use them often but there is a good tribe of goblins as a result of a cascade of events from a campaign a couple of decades ago.
I don't want to have to come up with detail for every race, species and monster. I'd rather spend my time on other aspects of the story. I don't see a problem with people having both options.
As
@Justice and Rule says, the issue is then with what stereotype you pick. Orcs are really weak example for you I think because the typical culture for them in D&D is just "generic barbarian". Like, literally there's no meaningful culture difference (in some cases no identifiable difference at all) between "violent barbarian" orcs and "violent barbarian" humans.
You can sum that up in one sentence. And it adds very little. It's not really providing value. Why not make the base something more interesting or valuable? You could apply "violent barbarian" to literally any race in the MM (or PHB!). Indeed, I've seen it done.
Whereas Hobgoblins at least have a slightly more complicated culture, and whilst you could probably sum it up as "Like Romans", that conjures up a heck of a lot more potential depth and interest than "generic barbarian".
In practice, a more balance idea of an Orc rather than just as an unthinking killing machine. If you want to spend a full entry on it detailing a more interesting society while keeping the trappings of a raider, look towards a society more closely built around how, say, the Vikings built theirs.
I mean, I'm not prepared right now to give you an actual pitch on "My Orcs" at this moment. But if you need like an immediate idea, one where they are perceived as bloodthirsty raiders but have a much more complex society would be my immediate go-to.
Yup this sort of thing could work well. I mean, Orcs are so generic, people haven't even worked out consistent ways they live. They're personality-free barbarian killers. But even if they are going to be killers, if you're going to bother describing them, and you don't just want to type "generic barbarian", which would save everyone a lot of time, describe something with a bit more depth and nuance. Like the Orsimer in Elder Scrolls, for example. They're not amazing but they actually have a culture and so on, not like, a nonsensical one-dimensional stereotype.
And whenever a race does get this done to it, it becomes more interesting, and more engaging, and usually, more popular (including as an enemy). Without Dragon Mountain doing this to Kobolds, I'm pretty sure they'd have basically fallen off the D&D radar between 2E and 3E, for example, a forgotten monster like so many, which people would question the existence of as just "even weaker Goblins".