Trial and Error Based Gameplay

[Sketchasaurus]

  I.E  The player sees a boss charging directly at them, they decide to move out of the way in some fashion, whether it be directly (a top-down game like Zelda) or by jumping/ducking (a Platformer like Castlevania).  A trial-and-error game would throw that kind of reasoning or logic out of the window, and have the boss do something the player would have no possible way to know ahead of time.

 Firstly, Games aren't even classified as trial and error games. The only example I can think of is "I Wanna Be the Guy" which was made to be masochistic and initially difficult, it's not designed to be anything other than that. Secondly, how would you ever be justified to expect the player to anticipate everything that's going to happen in a game before even playing it? Playing a game in itself is going into a new experience for which you don't know the outcome or the events that are about to unfold. You're trying to argue about a genre that doesn't exist.

 You give the player room for error (health bars, lives that don't send you back a million miles, etc.), or try to think of as many general possible reactions to a given situation the player may have, and reward those that are logical or derived from common sense

you are essentially restating what I've said previous with my Buzzy Beetle analogy. You facilitate learning through allowing the player to test and observe the new information they're being presented in the game, and leverage the relative risk with potential rewards, that's it. Whether or not a choice is logical to the game designer is moot if the logic of the game isn't communicated to the player; it's easy to fall into the trap of a creator's bias where a designer considers something to be obvious and figures "Oh, this makes sense, I don't need to explain it to anyone" which I shouldn't need to point out, is a poor design philosophy. "logic" and "common sense" are subjective to the game/environment in which they live, you teach the player the logic of the game by allowing them to fail and try again, later on, you can make more "common sense" assumptions, but you don't defy the logic you setup early in the game.

The reality is that there isn't a de facto point of equillibrium; it depends on the genre and the game; a huge part of effective game design is figuring out the balance between risk/reward within the confines of the game being designed.

The trope name of "Trial and Error" is more an extreme label for games in the ilk of "I Wanna Be the Guy" But even so, there's one huge thing that you seem to be neglecting in regard to tropes: Tropes are neither good nor bad, they just exist. A Trope is a recognizable pattern in media, that's what TVTropes is, a collection of observations, and avoiding anything you read on TVTropes as "I read this on TVTropes, therefore it is a bad element" is only going to hinder you from actually trying and figuring things out for yourself.