I think that in his first reign Bret Hart was a more random champion than those named so far. The only world title change I can think of, especially up to that time, not to have an angle leading up to it. Bret was up there on the card, but he had just lost the IC title, and yes that was in the main event of Summerslam but more for the England/Bulldog connection than his star power at the time. Bret's title victory was announced on a recap show, and then only shown in segments.
Bret didn't really have the look or presence of past champions, which was of course the point but supports the idea of it being random to the audience. Which WWE acknowledged with the subsequent "fighting champion" angle, to justify him as a champion. It seems like they spend all of Survivor Series 1992 presenting arguments for why you should take Bret seriously as the new champion.
Compared to Swagger, the world title meant a lot more at that time, not just because there was only one (as there should logically be, in my opinion, I mean with two simultaneous world titleholders it's impossible for either one of them to be
the champion, which is possibly by design but makes it difficult to put dramatic weight on either one of them for me). Bret didn't have the precedence that Swagger did either, of every MitB winner before him successfully challenging for and winning a title.
EDIT: I guess I'm kind of beating a dead horse but I did some research into how the
IWC of 1992 reacted to news of Bret's title victory:
"I wouldn't doubt it being true. Giving Flair a short title reign is something
McMahon would do if Flair was just a carry over champion (pray it is so :->).
But why Bret Hart, a man who lost the IC strap over a month ago?"
"Weird. Not sure why they bothered giving it to Flair in the first place if
he's not going to have any major angles with it. I also don't see any
major angles with Hart having the belt, so I'm kinda wondering why Vince
didn't just pass the belt form Savage to the unnamed heel (Razor Ramon?)
Vince has been one to not have his World Title change hands all that often.
Maybe he's trying to out-do Watts in the unpredictability department... "
"This sounds fishy.
Somebody better check their facts. "
"Its getting to the point where all the major stars can call themselves former WWF champions. Who's next Tatanka? "
"Vince's been cheapening the title which was held by the greats of
the "sport" such as Sammartino, Morales, and Backlund. "
"We're still in a stage of total denial over here (Ric didn't lose,
Ric didn't lose, Ric didn't lose, NOOOOOOOOOOOO!). It just
doesn't make any sense. It makes so little sense that people on
da net have been concocting the most ludicrous scenarios (e.g.
Papa Shango beating Hart for the belt). There are only a limited
number of reasons to give Hart the belt, and none of them make sense:
1. Hart will be the next long-term face champion.
This is almost laughable. He can't draw, and tho I personally like
his no frills character, he just doesn't fit the WWF champion
prototype (i.e., the long-term face champion prototype).
2. He's a transition so that the belt can go to another heel.
But why? Flair's the best heel they got, especially at a time
when their heel depth is the lowest ever (besides Flair and Razor,
the number three guy is who? Kimala? Papa Shango? Nailz?). With
the possibility of Hogan coming back, and the certainty of a large
push for Backlund, does Vince really think that these guy'll do
better money challenging guyz like Nailz? "
Yeah, the IWC overreacts about everything, but it's interesting to consider what that title change would've seemed like at the time the news broke. Also interesting is how apparently all of the newz at the the time was hyping up Backlund to be a major player and in the title scene by WMIX.