To Laugh and/or Learn

After a brief discussion with TheAbridgenator here regarding internet reviewers, I wondered what people’s opinions are here regarding internet reviewers. Specifically:
 
Do you prefer reviewers whom focus more on analysis, or those whom focus more on comedy?
 
As I said in the image post linked above, comedy for an analytical reviewer is supplemental, but not fundamental to their reviews. The analysis is what drives the review, not necessarily the comedy.
 
For comedy reviewers, the situation is reversed, with the comedy being fundamental and the analysis being supplemental.
 
I should note that in this case, comedy and analysis should not be considered dichotomous, but as more of a spectrum, and can co-exist harmoniously. This is more about the focus of the review: on the subject matter (analysis), or on making fun of the subject matter (comedy).
 
Examples of more analytical reviewers:
 
Confused Matthew  
SF Debris  
MrBtongue  
Smudboy  
Instig8ive Journalism  
Latter-day Nostalgia Chick  
Razorfist  
Extra Credits  
Jim Sterling  
MartialHorror (Meta-example, I know)
 
Reviewers whom fall in between:
 
Latter-day Nostalgia Critic  
CR  
Linkara  
Moviebob  
Former-day AVGN  
Todd in the Shadows  
Angry Joe  
Phelous
 
Reviewers focusing more on the comedy:
 
Former-day Nostalgia Critic  
Spoony  
Latter-day AVGN  
The Irate Gamer  
Obscurus Lupa
 
First off, these examples are a case of YMMV, because we each take something different away from the media we consume, in that while I may say that I consider SF Debris an analytical reviewer because that’s why I like his reviews, someone else may consider his either inbetween, or more of a comedy reviewer, because that’s what they like about his reviews.
 
Second off, you can probably tell by the examples used that I’m biased towards more analytical reviewers, since I had trouble coming up with more comedy focused reviewers (I don’t watch a lot of them).
 
So, good denizens of Derpibooru, do you prefer your reviews to focus on making you laugh, or on making you understand?

I definitely agree with you, while a bit of comedy can lighten up a review, the analysis is what makes it interesting. I find my favorite reviews to be the ones that help me analyse a piece better. In terms of negative reviews, I like to learn exactly why this particular piece didn’t work.
 
I have no problem with people enjoying the more comedic style found on That Guy with the Glasses but to me, it seems like an old trope that lost it’s appeal quickly. It worked great at first, but so many people latched on to it and try to force humor by making fun of bad movies / videog games / tv shows it quickly became old. More importantly, comedy is just icing. It’s there to supplement the actual substance; the analysis and information we can find. It’s the same reason so many people disliked Double Rainboom, all comedy with little substance.
 
Nostalgia Critic and AVGN understood that, wich is why they gradually included more serious analysis in their videos. The question of how much icing, or comedy, is needed in a review is clearly a question of preference. I find that a lot of internet reviewers ruin what would be a great review by forcing comedy. Linkara is the best example that comes to mind. Good reviewer, horrible comedian.
 
SF Debris is easily my favorite internet reviewer. He’ll focus first and foremost on reviewing the episode of the week and will only put in jokes when they come in naturally. Some reviews are more opened to comedy then others. It’s a question of balance.

>No Zero Punctuation/JonTron/ProJared
 

 
You’re dead to me.

@Blackie
 
It was 4:30 am local time when I wrote my original post, and I forgot, sorry.
 
Zero Punctuation would probably fall in the middle, even though IMO he’s leaning more toward the comedy rather than the analysis. He said so in an interview once that he focuses more on comedy than actually analysing a game for a review.

I pretty much like all 3 types.

The inbetween.

I’m always up for a good chuckle, and it seems like I can find those on the internet in spades; however, if I’m watching a review, I expect to glean information from it that will help me make better decisions. You know, because that’s the point of a review. If I go to a lecture I don’t expect to get stand-up. It’s not really a review if it just degenerates into topical humor; at that point, it’s just an Ask blog.
 
Heck, if I were to post reviews, they would definitely lean more towards analysis because, quite frankly, I wouldn’t post one unless I had a point I wanted to make in the first place; in fact, I’ve considered doing something like that before, and I suppose that would be more appropriate than dumping stuff like this at places like Derpibooru.

@Ebalosus  
Add Yhatzee.
 
I like to form my own opinion…first. Usually I prefer comedy.
 
^Upon further reflection that was rather stupid of me to say.  
Most people form their opinions first I imagine.  
Or maybe not, who knows? There are a lot of parrots I’m sure.
 
I parrot, and that’s a fact.

>egoraptor not mentioned  
>jontron not mentioned