Angry Joe is poor. It's this stereotypically "American" OTT unfunny rubbish like you get in those American kids shows like Hannah Montanna, and all the other things on the Disney channel.
It reeks of committee writing by a group of fanboys who are trying to be funny, but fail to grasp the concept of humour. The parts with the guy with the helmet seem to be attempting sarcasm, only they have no idea what sarcasm actually is. It's irritating, staged, and like many other "stereotypically American" productions, far too much money has been put into it, resulting in bright colours, and faaaaaaaaar too much going on in the video. While this may appease braindead slobs who are aroused at pretty colours, it's actually very shallow and cheap, becoming almost like a ultra conservative parents' worst nightmare of what gamers are like, and what video games do to kids.
The guy with the 'tache (is that Joe?) seems to be pretty smart, but he has poor presenting skills, and very little charisma. The difference between this show and Yahtzees is massive, mainly because Yahtzee's shows restraint, and pacing. It is cleverly worded, minimalistic, while not loosing any of the drive or humour.
At the end of the day, they are different shows, as Yahtzee is a critic, and Joe is a reviewer. Yahtzee doesn't give out "scores" at the end of his videos, leaving the whole thing down to personal preference. Joe is a guide as to what is good and what isn't, and in that respect (and that alone) his videos are more useful to a gamer interested whether or not to buy a game. Yahtzee points out the flaws in games, and is more directed at game makers, or aspirational game makers. However if Joe says a game is good, it might be. If Yahtzee says a game is good, it's a classic must have. That's an important difference to me.
To be fair, Joe lost the moment he made me sit through an unskippable advert (for Glee nonetheless) while waiting for his review.
