I personally respect Angry Joe's content, because I think he comes across as real. When he does his "rant" stuff, you know he does it because it's his shtick, and it's part of the persona of the channel, but when he does do these reviews, or discussions, he just says what he legit feels about the game. That's more valuable to me than any editorial piece, or complex written review. All media is subjective, and when he says he doesn't like something, or is disappointed, it's coming from a place of personal belief, and that alone has value to a viewer like me. Take it or leave it, if you don't agree with his opinion, that's your right. You're not supposed to agree with him all the time, and he even admits that some people might like certain aspects of games he doesn't like. His reviews come across as just being from the heart to me though, as corny as that sounds. He gives scores to games at the end of a review, but it doesn't feel like he's basing every thing on some kind of metric to reach that score. He says what he thinks about something, and based on that observation gives it a number that he think fits. That's how I would review something in the same position.
I don't even like watching a lot of his content, because I find some of it boring, but I will sometimes listen to him give a critique on something because I like hearing honest opinions. I find it so much more informative when someone just goes over positives and negatives in their head of what they thought about a game, rather than hearing someone say something like "this is what you might like", I'd rather hear about what YOU like, don't try to please me. His reviews have some comedy bits in them that I sometimes find funny, and again comedy is subjective, you might not like it, but some people do.
This post was mostly for the people who go on about why they don't understand why people still listen to Angry Joe or anyone in general.