Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Based on the discussion page
, we've made a distinction between tropers thinking a work is overhyped and works gaining a reputation for being overhyped since 2010. This isn't a new definition.
Audience-Alienating Premise has not been redefined at all. There's been discussion over if a work that targets a niche audience counts if it alienates the mainstream audience. Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
You claimed the the definition has been recently changed. I linked to the Hype Backlash discussion page because it hasn't been used in over five years and it supports using the "new criteria" to determine if an example fits. Nothing is getting changed on a whim. The discussion happened years ago. It's there if you want to read it.
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.I'm the trope who's been removing Hype Backlash examples per this
, I got permission to remove other misuses. Far as I could tell, Hype Backlash was always about backlash to praise, not disappointment, but it went though Trope Decay to shoehorn in complaining.
There are enough (majority at this point) legit examples examples that it's a legit trope. But a clearer name would help. "Praise Backlash" seems better since this trope is about a works praise, not hype. If you want to take it to TRS I'd support fixing it.
The main problem is the name of the trope. I'm thinking that the main reason for it being misued for such a long time is because of the trope's description doesn't fit the actual name of the trope. People added Hype Backlash to works that were anticipated but disappointing because of the name itself (something has a lot of hype built up behind it, it fails to meet the hype it garnered, fans call out the work for not being as good as the creators made it looked like it would be.)
If anything, the trope's name is far too misleading. Why else do you think it was on so many works that failed to live up to their expectations? Although I also found it somewhat humorous that it took that forum post to get someone to realize that the example had to be removed from nearly every YMMV page. Also that description in that forum post isn't on the actual trope's main page, so people will naturally get confused over what it's supposed to really mean.
Um, did you guys notice the backlog of TRS topics that nobody has worked on? Also, what is presented here is not quite enough to justify a new TRS thread, we'd need evidence of multiple instances of misuse.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

So on the Beauty and the Beast (2017) page, almost two years back, I added a Hype Backlash to the page and it seemed like it followed the basic qualifications to be added there. This is what it used to say:
Hype Backlash: When it was revealed that Disney would be releasing a live-action adaptation of the 1991 film, many people were very happy since that version was done so well. After it was released, while many people regard it a good film, some beg to differ and question why it was remade to begin with given how slavishly faithful it is. This overlaps with fatigue with Disney's recent trend of releasing at least one live-action adaptation of an animated canon film every year, or alternatively a belated sequel as in the case of Mary Poppins Returns in 2018. Even some people who enjoy it still feel it's not as good as the original, and/or unfavorably compare it to the company's previous two adaptations in this vein, which took more liberties with their material. It's largely a matter of personal taste and what one thinks of the changes made to the animated versions' storylines, tones, etc.
It was even kept when the site decided to redefine the trope altogether and when the trope was being removed for numerous YMMV pages for not meeting the new criteria. I look at the page's history now and I found the example removed, citing that it doesn't meet the current criteria, quote About fans or critics praising it such audiences don't think it measures up. Not just disappointment.
Honestly, as this point can we just get a vote to remove Hype Backlash altogether? It seems that every few months we keep redefining what a YMMV trope is supposed to mean and if said trope can remain on the page for more nearly two years only to be deleted randomly even after redefining it, what's the point of even keeping it? This wouldn't even be that much of a deal for me if it weren't for the fact that said entry was on the page for almost two years without anyone complaining or thinking it didn't fit with the trope.
Now look, Audience-Alienating Premise made a bit of sense because the name itself made the idea of what the trope means far too vague (now it's supposed to be used if a work has a niche audience/reaction, I honestly don't know) but I legit don't think we should even bother keeping Hype Backlash if we can never decide on what it's supposed to really mean.