TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Go To

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.

Ask the Tropers:

Trope Related Question:

Make Private (For security bugs or stuff only for moderators)

Mimic1990 Since: Oct, 2016
2020-11-26 18:19:09

My understanding of it is that They Changed It, Now It Sucks! is for whenever something gets changed - either in an adaptation, a sequel, a game update, etc. and some fans don't like it.

The problem with this example is that it doesn't explain how it's a fan reaction.

Ferot_Dreadnaught Since: Mar, 2015
2020-11-26 18:33:25

It's supposed to mean fans don't like how he's characterized here. But it's not the change, but the execution, they dislike. So misuse?

NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2020-11-27 00:08:03

In defense of the specific example, we are talking about a sequel (or rather, prequel) here. In addition, there are aspects of Adam's personality/actions that were flat-out changed. For example, the entire axis their characterizations revolve around in Other M is that Samus left his command without his okay, which she's desperate to make up for and he seemingly resents her for. In the manga which originally portrayed the character, Adam was the one who suggested she strike out on her own and gave him her blessing.

That being said, I'm not defending the example from deletion or rewrite. Just playing Devil's Advocate.

Ferot_Dreadnaught Since: Mar, 2015
2020-11-27 00:34:52

I'm aware it can be considered an example under current rules. That it's being used to add complaints that have been stated more constructively elsewhere on the page had got me thinking what keeps this trope from devolving into complaining.

Mimic1990 Since: Oct, 2016
2020-11-27 03:30:47

It seems fine to me. It's not screaming or all caps or giant walls of text. Just let people have their opinions, man.

TantaMonty Since: Aug, 2017
2020-11-27 04:30:16

The problem is that Adam's portrayal in Other M is completely different than in previously established canon. Fusion described him as a caring father figure to the protagonist, as well as a military genius. In Other M, the former trait is changed so he is cold and aloof towards Samus; whereas the latter is arguably absent, as his decision to split his platoon into weaker units culminates with The Mole picking them off one by one. I agree with the example, and I'm one of the only five people in the world who genuinely enjoyed the game.

Mimic1990 Since: Oct, 2016
2020-11-27 05:20:31

^ Hey, what are the odds two of the five are both here in this thread?

But yeah, I agree. It's a legitimate example. You can't remove it just because it's negative, as long as it's not overly so.

MrDeath Since: Aug, 2009
2020-11-27 08:05:13

The thing is, the trope is supposed to document fans' reactions to a change — that the fans saw a change, and said it sucked.

The trope is not supposed to be used to actually complain, "They changed this thing in a way that sucks."

It's TV Tropes recording the fan reaction; it isn't the fan reaction itself.

Ngamer01 Since: Oct, 2010
2020-11-27 08:13:22

MrDeath has a point. As it stands now, the item just says this part of the work is bad. It does not give context about the fandom reaction. It's basically the same problem self-explanatory tropes have in that people think the name alone is enough context for an item.

Edited by Ngamer01
Ferot_Dreadnaught Since: Mar, 2015
2020-11-27 10:42:18

My impression was They Changed It, So It Sucks (per it's page) is supposed to be complaints that would seem overblown, nitpicky, arbitrary, or unfair to outside observers, and is knee-jerk against the mere act of changing as opposed to what is was changed to.

If it explained why Adam's characterization wouldn't have been as objectionable if not for changing his prior characterization, it would count.

Also, all that (intentionally) changed was retcons about being a parental substitute. He was ultimately portrayed (ie supposed to be seen) with the same positive portrayal as prior works. The hate and complaints are against the very, very poor job it did at portraying it, not the (clearly unintentional) change.

That's the issue I see with the trope, without clear rules to counteract the hate and negative emotions the trope covers it's interfering with the objective analysis of the work that is the purpose of the wiki.

SeptimusHeap MOD (Edited uphill both ways)
2020-11-28 02:06:15

This should probably be discussed on the discussion page.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Top