#the empire needs its enemies weaker yet always on the cusp of winning through monstrous means

[rawliverandgoronspice]

Anon who asked to share my thoughts. They might be a bit complicated since I'm not a native-English speaker so writing long stuff gets a bit rambly. Sorry, long.

To me the narrative between Zonai: Good Ganondorf(+Gerudo): Bad. Felt really weird because of how afraid Totk is about actually showing any kind of depth to the story.

Framing:

You start with, the story has a very black and white narrative. Sonia and Rauru are the good guys. You don’t even need to question it, because no matter what happens they are the good guys. They’re kind, just, and righteous.  No hint of any grey morality or anything. On the other side is Ganondorf, that guy doesn’t even get a second into his introduction in the 1st tear before he does something evil with no fanfare, no reasoning, we’re just dropped in the middle of his act of war. We are told “Yep, this guy is evil. You don’t even need to question it.” There’s not even a single line to give a background why he’s doing what he’s doing.

Ganondorf is standing against Rauru with a comparably miniscule number of warriors, vs Rauru who's got the allegiance of ALL the races in Hyrule including Gerudo and his superior power. We might not see that all the time, but the narrative makes it clear that this is the case. Why every race decided to bow down before them, and how they managed this feat is never explained, we’re just told this is the case. It feels very flat because again, it’s a “Just trust us, they’re the good guys.” We're just to believe no one objected, and everyone gladly decided to swear loyalty to the Zonai claiming to be backed by the Gods, and that all this happened with no hostilities beyond Ganondorf? That this was a completely peaceful takeover? Even with the Zora who already have their own royal-family? The Gerudo also already had their own line of succession, so what would they need a new King and Queen for?

Sonia and Rauru also seem very young, while I'd guess Ganondorf to be the equivalent of the older-adult Gerudo. Of course, Rauru might as well be much older than Ganondorf, we don’t know that, but even so, Rauru and Sonia both are seemingly very new to being rulers. It’s also not established if Zonai ruled before. Who the Zonai were in context to the other races. How the dynamics between all of them played out. Etc. (Heck, the game didn't even explain the connections between Barbarian armour set, which is Zonai in origin but actually has no real visual connection to anything we see.)

With Rauru also believing he's descended from the Goddesses, it gives a bit of an almost "born to rule" perspective even if he might not see it as that, but it comes across as such, especially since he says they founded Hyrule. Again, what was the Zonais role before they left? Were they equals, or did they always have a role of “ruling class”? Why would he think that him becoming King would be so much better for Hyrule? Was there war between the races? Was there some other issues that made it necessary?

While I can very much acknowledge that in this case Rauru and his folk ARE the good guys in this story, because that’s how this narrative works. What you see in Totk is what you get, there’s no depth to be explored, and you have to take it all at face value. I will still admit that if I could imagine this story to have more depth, and if this story had more layers, rather than just being very black and white, it could almost have become a “The good guys are blinded by their own hubris, and their overreach in wishing to rule the other races caused much civil war and strife within these races” where Ganondorf might have been the loudest and strongest faction against bowing before Rauru.

So factoring in the points already mentioned, a deeper story might have gone "Older King Ganondorf sees every race bowing down, even his own, before a Zonai calling himself descended from the Goddesses deciding he's in the right to rule above all other races, with his young Hylian wife. Only through their word and assurances that he has the "Godly" right to rule. Ganondorf refuses to acknowledge Rauru and Sonia as rulers above the Gerudo and even himself. A civil war breaks lose within the Gerudo, and Ganondorf and his people leave, while those bowing down to Rauru stay behind.” I've noted, the story never really actually explains how or why Rauru decided to establish new Hyrule. (I read all the ancient tablets, and they just skirt around it.) It also becomes extra strange when you note that Rauru already had the loyalty of the Gerudo, it just wasn’t Ganondorf and his group of Gerudo; whom he then insisted to try and win over.

I think with that idea in mind, Ganondorf's monologue about wasted potential about Rauru's powers could also makes sense as a callout against Rauru’s haughtiness and belief in his own Godly greatness: "So you're saying you're descended from Gods but you need a secret stone, and this is all you can do? Well now see how it goes when I even the playing-field." It becomes more of a "mortal challenging a God" dynamic. Even the Secret stones; Rauru only gave them to those who swore absolute fealty to him it seems, which could make sense, but it also makes it so that it puts him and Sonia, and his Kingdom above all the other races, with them his "servants" for a lack of a better word. Even if they are genuinely loyal to him, would that actually have meant they were the true rulers of their people? Or just the first ones to bow down. By Gerudo rule, Ganondorf was the true King of the Gerudo, yet a different Gerudo was appointed Chief it seems, when Ganondorf refused to bow down.

In Oot we at least got more of a foundation: 400 year war. Racism. Hyrule's King comes across as pretty incompetent. Koume and Kotake having a bad influence. (They also experienced at least 3 previous Gerudo King's in those 400 years, so wonder what happened there.) You get a better picture of Oot Ganondorf's motivation. I’m not saying Oot is perfect, but at least it wasn’t as black and white, and we actually did get some depth for motivations and reasons.

Yeah, fully agreed. Not much more notes to add haha.

Honestly, the more I think about it, and the more puzzled I am by the fact that the game chose to portray Ganondorf as the underdog of the conflict --not that he wasn't openly hostile since the very first second we see him, but it's established that he not only lived in Hyrule before Rauru's takeover AND that he couldn't scratch Hyrule even with his best efforts. If the game wanted me to feel sympathy towards Rauru and Sonia, the hylian/zonai side should have been actively struggling against the invasion, the secret stones the only thing barely keeping them out of harm until Ganondorf pretended an alliance (rather than a seddition) and then stole it from Sonia. At least make them equal in power, then it would have been clear that one side of the conflict plays dirtier than the other rather than... playing the only hand they were dealt with? And then, like, keep Ganondorf on the lookout for the rest of the stones? Or for zonite? Instead of exclusively focusing on eliminating Rauru and his allies? The game had many, many options to make Ganondorf pettier and motivated by power or greed in ways that were clearer and more coherent, and the fact that it didn't and made him this sort of puppet (ironically enough) that makes no internal sense whatsoever but solely exists to provide conflict for the heroes whenever needed really bugs me. It's just disrespectful towards the character they knowingly marketed as one of the core selling points of the game imho, and also disrespectful to the potential of the rest of their cast who deserved better stakes and character arcs.