I began watching Gameranx in 2013, back when Jake Baldino would still do those awkward green screen segments, and the channel still had the sense of three guys in a basement figuring out the nuances of YouTube.Now it's 2025, and I'm still following their "Before You Buy" videos like it's some kind of religious practice. Dunkey? Yeah, I've been subscribed to that chaos since he was making League of Legends videos; I continue to witness the metamorphosis of a guy making jokes about video games to now...well, still just a guy making jokes about video games to now one of the most insightful critics on the platform.

So, these two channels basically created a model for the way I think about games.I mean, I know that sounds dramatic, but it's the truth.Prior to finding them, I was an impulse buy when it came to video games based on trailers and marketing schemes, and I was being burned, on the rag, time to time (I have impulse issues).Now I only needed to wait for one weekend until Jake tells me if a game is worth sixty bucks, or I wait for Dunkey's take on an indie game, maybe I have never heard of before, that is secretly operatic.

What is also strange is that they are so different.Gameranx feels professional, they have schedules, a cohesive format, even a modicum of production value.Dunkey uploads whatever he has the idea to upload.His videos look like they were edited by a person who has metraxia, and half the time he does not know if he is serious or not.Despite the differences of polish, both of the men cut through the bullshit of the gaming industry and do so better than any traditional review website I have ever read.Jake

Baldino and the Art of Not Being Boring

The wonderful thing about Gameranx is Jake cracked the code for being informative without boring you to death. You know how most video game journalism feels like a homework assignment? It's all wordy technical jargon and odd numbered reviewing systems that don't actually inform you about if you'll enjoy playing the thing? Jake just talks to you like a person.

His "Before You Buy" format is brilliant in its simplicity. Instead of devising some arbitrary score, he actually asks the questions you are thinking about: Is it buggy? How long does it take to beat? Am I going to be bored halfway through? Is it full-price worthy or do I wait for a sale? Certainly not hard questions to think of, but still, most reviewers never even bother to explore those.

I remember watching Jake's review of Cyberpunk 2077 the day the game was released. Meanwhile, other outlets were frantically running around updating their reviews as the game disintegrated, Jake had already articulated most of the issues because he actually played the thing on a stock PS4 instead of some developer's cool supercomputer. He wasn't in the hype or the backlash like others – he simply told people what it was like to play the game.

This consistency has turned Gameranx into one of my preferred video game media selections. Not necessarily because Jake and I have the same taste – we don't – but I know where his biases are. He loves open-world games, he isn't great at platformers that are difficult, and he gets annoyed with repetitious grinding. Now I can compare his views to my own gaming tastes. Although the channel has expanded rapidly over the years, with Falcon creating news-type videos, different hosts handling various content, and better graphics and editing, Jake is still the heart of the channel. He has improved in his role at the same time as he has not lost what it was that first made him appealing. Jake seems more comfortable on camera and no longer seems as prone to verbal missteps or losing his train of thought. The transition has been slow-balanced enough that you do not really notice unless you go back and watch earlier videos. Their earlier "Gameranx News" segments were so forgettable as just segment to read press releases with a minimal amount of addition commentary. Now, they provide context and analysis you can use to understand why certain events are significant in the gaming space. With Microsoft's purchase of Activision Blizzard, they did not just tell you the price they mentioned and talked about what the implications for gaming releases, subscription services, and consolidation if the industry as a whole. Their "Top 10" lists could have been scrap paper and the same for what they put into them. For example, "10 Games That Surprised Us This Year" title is not one generated to get clicks. The list is typically full of games I had never heard of, or those I had prematurely dismissed on the basis of trailers. I have found some of favorite indie games from those lists. Dunkey's Beautiful Chaos should not work as a gaming critic out it certainly does.His edited videos are total disarray, a collage of random footage, inside jokes that have no value if you have not watched all of his other videos, and voices that run the gamut from mumbled incoherence to yelling aggression. For example, he'll make jokes about a game's menu for five minutes before he nonchalantly states the most thoughtful and insightful observation about game design you will hear all week.

But that is what makes it all work, in contrast to other reviewers who bog things down in specifications and objective analysis. Dunkey focuses on the only real question when evaluating a game: Is this game fun? He could not care less about frame rates or resolution counts if the gameplay is dry and boring; he will praise a game that looks bad but has awesome mechanics.

His "Best of" lists became must-watch videos to me. Not because I agreed with him all the time, but because he always brings up games I would have never played otherwise. For example, "Outer Wilds" was on his list in 2019, and it became one of my all-time favorite gaming experiences. "Hades" came up before Hades had made it mainstream. He was ahead of the curve on "Celeste" before it got popular, too.

The serious Dunkey videos are a whole different animal. His "Game Critics" video decimated the pretensions of gaming journalism better than a hundred graduate student essays ever could. He made a simple, yet powerful point: most video game reviewers never even consider if a video game is enjoyable to play. They get lost in the graphics, or the story, or the production values and forget about the number one criteria for a game: is it fun?His analysis of "The Last of Us Part II" was exceptional exactly because it had no interest in being balanced or fair. He focused on what didn't work for him and said why it did so in believable language. Whether he aligned with your opinion of the game or not, you knew exactly what he was saying. Compare that to the professional reviews that diluted and hedged every opinion until they did not say much useful at all.

The Mario stuff deserves a special shout out. Dunkey's videos reminiscing about Mario games are basically masterclasses on game design formatted as comedy videos. In his "Super Mario Bros. 2" video, he breaks down complicated ideas of design through jokes, and examples of gameplay to make points about level design and player agency that would be dense and boring writing in a college paper but become memorable through Dunkey's chaotic delivery.

Even Dunkey's worst videos are interesting. Even while he may completely miss the point of a game or his jokes do not land whatsoever, there is typically something fascinating about his view. Dunkey's infamous "Octopath Traveler" video received a lot of hate, but Dunkey's critical observations of modern JRPG design were valid to consider whether or not you disagreed with him.

How They Changed Gaming Content

Before channels like Gameranx and Dunkey found their groove, the gaming content on YouTube was awful. You had angry reviewers yelling about everything, Let's Players who thought their personalities were more interesting than the game they were playing, and corporate channels that were just marketing departments pretending to be people.These individuals had shown it was possible to be funny without being obnoxious, to be educational without being boring, and to be critical without being cynical. They demonstrated that audiences genuinely wanted honest perspectives from people who truly cared about games and not just any content for clicks or advertising dollars.

When you take a look at the gaming YouTube scene, the impact is pretty obvious at this point.Everybody and their moms have been plugging away at trying to imitate Dunkey's style of editing, or Jake's style of presentation that is conversational. Almost none of them get what made Dunkey and Jake work: enthusiasm and knowledge and familiarity that made each video interesting. You can't fake that for years; audiences can tell that you care about games.

The traditional gaming media has and continues to struggle adapting to this shift. Magazines are dead, and many gaming websites seem inconsequential compared to YouTube personalities who react and summarize news without paying any mind to how a relationship with advertising or the traditional game press. When a blockbuster game launches in shambles, I would much rather check in with what Jake thinks than digest reviews on a website that seem platformed in a diplomatic process.

The creator economy has changed everything about how video games are covered. Developers and publishers care more about getting positive coverage from influential YouTubers than from traditional press. Unlike a good review in a gaming magazine, a positive mention in Dunkey's video or recommendation on Gameranx can move boxes off the shelf.

That has its own value.Creators like Jake and Dunkey have built trust with their audiences through years of providing consistent content, but they aren't held to journalistic ethics like at least traditional media is supposed to be. They can demonstrate biases, have personal relationships with developers, or have financial interests that aren't always clear to the viewer.

The Business Side Nobody Talks About

Both channels are figuring out how to monetize themselves without hurting their content. This is a more daunting challenge than it may seem, especially in gaming when audiences are sensitive to bias and conflict of interest.

Gameranx is juggling multiple streams of revenue while still attempting to maintain editorial independence. They do work with sponsors, and Jake is usually very forth coming when content is sponsored and it does not influence his opinions on the games. They also accept review copies of games from developers, which is standard, but it raises concerns when they review games from companies they have had a continuing business relationship with.

The difficulty comes from solid editorial independence ultimately isn't really possible if you want to produce timely coverage of new games. Review copies and early access are necessary for timeliness, but implicitly puts pressure to do everything to maintain a good relationship with the publisher, to ensure the review copy, or the early access, is there next time. Gameranx seems to do this reasonably well, but, this will always be there tension.

Dunkey, has taken a more purist approach in that he buys most of his games, and refuses sponsorship deals if they don't align with his content. This is a hindrance for revenue, and the sponsorship opportunities can be enticing, but it preserves his credibility.His merchandise revenue and support from Patreon allow him to be independent while monetizing from content creation.

These different approaches come down to different priorities. Gameranx is focused on being a sustainable business that hires multiple people to create content consistently. Dunkey prioritizes creative freedom and authenticity, over making as much money as possible. Both strategies are viable, that just have different trade-offs.

What Makes Gaming Content Actually Good

After watching so many of these channels for years, I think I've come to understand what distinguishes good gaming content from the tons of garbage that fill Youtube.It comes down to a few things:

Authenticity matters more than production value. Jake's early videos looked terrible by today's standards, but you could still feel his enthusiasm for games. Even when Dunkey's videos look chaotic, you never don't know that he actually cares about the medium. An audience can tell when a creator is passionate for their content, and when they are really just trying to produce stuff.

Knowledge depth is an important factor. Both creators demonstrate that they play a lot of games and have some understanding of how genres work, and larger university dynamics creating good or bad designs, and how particular release games fit into a larger video game canon. You can't fake deep understanding, it shows in the analysis of games.

Consistency allows audiences to trust. Gameranx has stayed consistent in their upload schedule and content style for years. Dunkey is probably less consistent, but his videos are always his real opinions. Both channels display consistency where viewers generally know what they are getting when they watch.

Transparent and honest with biases allows viewers calibrate opinions.Jake acknowledges when he struggles with certain games or isn't a fan of certain types of games. Dunkey does this implicitly through his content and the way he evaluates it. Together, they explain to their audiences how to think about their evaluations with respect to their individual tastes.

Their focus is on player experience and not specs. The two creators will prioritize the questions "Is this fun?" or "Is this worth your time?" over context, and the extent of the content they look at (e.g., charts, frame rates, graphic comparisons). This aligns to how most players are thinking when evaluating what games they want to play.

The Communities They Created

What is also interesting about both channels are the communities they've established that align to each of their styles. Gameranx videos typically have people discussing in depth about games in the comment section. People will tell other commenters their own experience with a game Jake covered, recommend other games with a similar experience, or suggest design approaches that may have merit and can be evaluated.

Dunkey's community, while more meme driven and less analtyical, is also genuinely engaged with gaming. His comment sections contain some memes and jokes and references to his prior videos, but also contain legitimate discussion about the games he covered. His viewers often find new games through his videos and share their experience of play with other community members.

In both communities, it's significantly less toxic than not just other games spaces online, but online in general. This may just be due to the way each creator approaches games - each with some enthusiasm and little cynicism - or it may be that both communities' members are a little more mature. In either case, review company's comment section feels like a space where people enjoy talking about games rather then complaining about them.

Of course, this true for just the comments section.I've seen Gameranx, Dunkey, video games, forum content, social media posts, and even in conversations with gaming friends. The contributions of content creators have shaped the gaming culture in a way that traditional media hasn't done to this extent.

Where Gaming Content Goes From Here

Both channels represent potentially viable means to produce content, at least at the moment, regarding where for YouTube gaming age we are in, but that very well may change. Changes in the YouTube algorithm, narrative changes related to monetization policy, and desires of content creator audiences for more diversity and volatility in their creator experience, do not always lend themselves to a positive experience.

In addition, with the growing popularity of live streaming on YouTube and other platforms, the ability for viewers to respond to content in real-time has created new opportunities and challenges to traditional video content. While Gameranx and Dunkey have both accessed formats expressed in live streaming, live streaming has not been in the commitment of their previous content.

In addition to potential content opportunities involving live streaming, the rapid growth of mobile gaming would present accommodations of some of the creators either in a PC or console gaming world were not accessible in their plan. Content for mobile gaming may be in between pacing, variety of gaming interests, and delivery style in presentation that is inherently suited to mobile experiences.In addition, new gaming platforms and emerging technologies will lead creators to explore content experience relevant to cloud gaming, VR, and gaming technology in a home console experience. Finding success in communicating and framing their creative perspective on these experiences to their audience will likely impact gaming culture.

This Is Me Personally

I’ve honestly thinking about why these channels have had some meaning to me personally beyond simply entertainment value or game recommendations.Partly, it's nostalgia – I've been following them long enough that they feel like familiar voices in an ever-evolving media landscape. But, it is more than nostalgia.

They have impacted how I assess entertainment media. Jake's concern with utilitarian questions like "Is this worth your money?" and "How much time does this require?" has changed how I consider not just video games, but also movies, books, and other types of entertainment. Dunkey's concern with fun rather than technical achievement has made me more willing to try out strange indie games and less impressed with blockbuster machine projects that look beautiful but are fun to play.

Both of these creators have created a major career based on their true passion for something they enjoy. Neither of these creators started life as professional entertainers nor professional journalists; they were just people who enjoyed the game and wanted to share their thoughts about it. In an age in which nearly all career advice seems to center on pursuing market demands rather than things you enjoy, that is truly a breath of fresh air.

Tracking their channels and seeing how skills are developed over time has also been an interesting element of both of these creators. Although you can see that Jake's presentation skills have tailored considerably, it has happened slowly enough that it is easy to miss unless you go back and watch old to new videos. Dunkey's editing has become more advanced, but this is still in line with his chaotic style.Both illustrate that improvement in any pursuit is a lengthy process fueled by incremental gains and not a series of spectacular moments.

A Larger Context

Gaming content creation embodies something much more significant regarding changing media and entertainment. Traditional gatekeepers (publishers, editors, network executives) control somewhat less than they did before on what projects get made and what audiences see or experience. For creators that can connect directly with audiences, opportunities present themselves that did not exist 20 years ago.

This democratization has its pros and cons. Oftentimes, more voices can find audiences without needing to convince corporate decision-makers that the value of their voice is worth anything. On the other hand, the absence of any editorial oversight can also mean more low-quality content, misinformation, and creators who may prioritize engagement over accuracy or usefulness.

Gameranx and videogamedunkey are two examples that lean into the positive aspects of this landscape. They are both carving out sustainable careers for themselves by providing real value while remaining consistent with their authenticity and creative vision. They have both demonstrated that high-quality content can connect with audiences without significant backing from corporate brands, or without traditional media credentials.

Their success tells us that niche expertise has significant value in an ever-fragmenting media ecosystem. These creators intentionally do not want to appeal to everyone, and they have developed their followings on a commitment to serving gaming audiences well. They have developed very loyal audiences that contribute financially to their work.

As gaming expands its reach as an entertainment medium and cultural force, creators like videogamedunkey and Gameranx may play a major role in shaping everyone's understanding and appreciation of interactive entertainment. The influence of their work has spread beyond their subscriber counts, and their practices will only shape more practice to develop gaming content in the future.

The gaming content ecosystem that their work has contributed to, is more honest, more diverse, and more useful than it was prior to their joining the creator community. and that contribution is meaningful in a world where entertainment is the baseline, and their changing practice will likely influence the next generation of creators in the gaming space on developing their own voice, and form of practice around covering a medium that is changing all the time.

Looking back at over a decade of watching these channels, what strikes me most is their consistency. Not just in upload schedules or content quality, but in their genuine enthusiasm for games and their respect for their audiences. In an internet culture that often rewards cynicism and controversy, both have built successful careers by staying positive about the medium they love while being honest about its flaws.

The Evolution of My Gaming Habits

In retrospect, it was more than just a change in the types of media in which I consumed gaming content – it fundamentally changed my engagement with games in general. I was what you might call a "hype gamer." I would see a trailer for a game and immediately pre-order, only to feel disappointed when it did not live up to what was depicted in the marketing. I experienced this with "Watch Dogs," launch "No Man's Sky," "Anthem," and countless others that seemed spectacular in promotional clips or images but felt flat when I played them. Jake was practical and pushed me to ask better questions. Instead of just "does this look cool?" I started thinking in terms of, "will I even finish this game?" and "is it worth sixty dollars, or should I wait for it to go on sale?" That shift has saved me hundreds of dollars and countless minutes of frustration trying to play mediocre games. Dunkey was different too but just as impactful. The way he valued gameplay over everything else had me contemplating what I actually enjoyed about games. I used to care a lot about graphics and production values in games. If a game was not up to par, I wouldn't even consider it. Watching Dunkey praise games like "Spelunky" and "Hollow Knight" while critiquing how beautiful but boring most AAA games were, made me realize I was allowing my focus on the seemingly wrong things in the gaming industry to overlook incredible experiences. Now, if you look at my Steam library, it looks quite different than it did ten years ago.It's filled with strange indie games discovered through Dunkey's videos and AAA games we've chosen carefully based on Jake's "Before You Buy" test. I'm spending less money on games, but I enjoy them more, which seems opposite to what most of the industries in entertainment want you to do.

The patience thing was huge too. Both of these creators taught me that almost every game will go on sale at some point, and my extensive realization that it doesn't matter if I'm behind the new releases for a few months, unless I'm trying to avoid spoilers of course. Jake's "wait for a sale" recommendations are essentially gospel at this point; why pay the full price for that game, if I am likely able to get it for half price in six months?

These changes of gaming habits represent a bigger change within me related to how I consume entertainment. I have become more skeptical of marketing, I've become more patient in my purchasing, and more willing to approach something that isn't a meme or trend. A little tweeks that seem very small, but outcome of changes were bigger in terms of my overall satisfaction with the media I consume.

The Technical Side: How They Actually Make This Stuff

One thing that became clear in that time frame was just the extent of work that has gone into it, to make it seem so effortless. It seems to flow naturally and be conversational, but you can recognize how much thought and preparation there is behind it. It has structure, paced well, and he rarely stumbles over his words anymore. None of this happens by accident.

I remember some of the earlier Gameranx videos where Jake lost his thought mid-sentence or struggled with reading the telepromptor.Now he presents his content in such a way that the video features the relevant gameplay footage, graphics, and transitions that back his claims. The change is pretty stark when comparing 2013 Jake and 2025 Jake, but it all happened gradually enough so as not to be observed by longtime viewers as a change in approach. There is also an abundance of thought that goes into his selection of gameplay footage. Early gaming YouTubers were oftentimes very arbirtary in their approach to selection, and he still puts thought into what footage he shows. For example, if Jake is discussing game combat, he shows gameplay footage of combat. If Jake is talking about performance issues in a game he shows examples of dropped frames or bugs in the game. This may appear obvious, but I see plenty of gaming channels that still fail to make this connection.

Dunkey's technical approach is much more chaotic but is technical in a different way. Though the rapid firing, music-heavy editing style appears random, it takes a degree of planning and execution to achieve good cuts, animations, and sound syncing. The manner in which he build the engagement to the punchlines is really impressive in a technical way.

His audio editing is much more sophisticated. Whether it be game sound, music, voice clips, sound effects, or the layering of those, he exploits the audio without reservation to create specific comedic effects. The "Knack 2" meme wouldn't be possible, if the timing of the music and audio were not done just right, and some of the comedic effects you see are not possible without the specific audio timing. This type of audio layer and timing is not simple and takes time that casual viewing cannot or will not pay attention to unless someone has attempted to do it themselves.

Both of these channels had to advance their technical approaches to suit the changing requirements of YouTube standards.Expectations for video quality have progressed, algorithmic preference has changed, and newer features like end screens and community posts have been added into the equation. Creators need to stay abreast of both change and also navigate a landscape where quality is still paramount to their content.

Production schedules are also likely more demanding than they first seem. Gameranx has a regular upload cadence across multiple content types, and even if they’re not cranking out the highest production videos, it still requires some coordination and planning, and backup video, for when all else fails. Dunkey has less frequent uploads, but even still, he spends a ton of time gathering gameplay footage, writing scripts, and editing.

The Games That Changed Everything

Some games served as cultural benchmarks for both Dunkey and Jake, and watching how they engaged with those games has taught me a number of things about game criticism, and the industry overall. "The Witcher 3" was a big one. Jake's video broke down exactly what made The Witcher 3 more than just a video game with technical achievements. Jake discussed how the multiple side quests had an impact on the central narrative, how the choices within the game truly mattered, and how the world design encouraged exploration. This was not simply "graphics good" or "story good," but an analysis of what makes the game work as an interactive experience.

Dunkey's take on The Witcher 3 was also characteristically different, but insightful in its own right. He discussed the gameplay systems, specifically how they supported some of the narrative elements while also pointing to places the game didn't work quite as well. Dunkey’s game criticism was honest and specific; he helped viewers understand what the game did"Cyberpunk 2077" effectively illustrates the unique roles different content creators play during a major game release. For example, I (Jake) had a very watchable day-one "Before You Buy" video about the game, which talked about the technical and performance issues that all the "professional" reviewers either glazed over in their reviews or never mentioned at all. I played through the game like almost anyone else on standard consoles and tried to report honestly about what players could expect above and beyond simply releasing a score out of ten in review. The next perspective instead came from Dunkey's later video on "Cyberpunk 2077," where as an example, provided a different insight from Jake indicating the game failed to live up to expectations. Likewise, Dunkey chose not to speak to the bugs and technical aspects like Jake had done, but provide insight into the gameplay systems that presented dissatisfaction regardless of polish. Thus, they both provided valued works, just a different approach.

We could offer "Hades" as another case. Dunkey was an early adapter to "Hades," even ringing it up on his 'best of' games list prior to any of the mainstream reviews. As an early adapter, his enthusiasm provided an early signal to a broader audience and helped give it some talent acknowledgement that game alone would not have enjoyed. The true game changing question that content creators like Dunkey provide the ability to ask of "Hades" and Jake, to have some tempered but positive assumptions about the game's accessibility and re-playablity. For Jake, just even the endorsement to play a game like "Hades" is valid for his own audience and to new audiences, especially when the game is the default rogue-like game for audiences that may be unaware of what the genre even represents in terms of game experience. An audience that after a creative presentation from Jake might – as an example, link up their Play Station and not only join their default genre specific audiences but a broader experience including the genre fans, then play Hades.

This class of case indicates gaming content creators fulfill different but potentially complementary functions in gaming discourse. Jake assists with a valid and practical good purchase decisions, while Dunkey provides comedian-cultural critique that can assist in a better understanding of reasons why builders may want to build without much to draw the audiences attention to inherent entertainment value.

The Community Element: More Than Comments

The online communities surrounding both channels extend well beyond the comments sections of video sharing platforms like YouTube. Both creators have built a community of viewers who interact with each other around gaming, in ways that are reflective of the philosophy of content that each creator produces on their channel.

Gameranx viewers tend to be practical gamers who share recommendations, value propositions, and criticism of different games. The community feels more focused on one another in terms of helping each other make better gaming decisions, rather than simply sharing their opinions. When someone asks for recommendations in comments, they are often met with considered responses from fellow viewers who have an understanding of how their channel approaches the review process.

This sense of practicality also extends to how the viewer interacts with the surrounding gaming industry. Fans of Gameranx seem more likely to wait and check for reviews first, robably considers reviews from multiple outlets before making a purchase, and approach gaming news with at least some amount of healthy skepticism. The channel has effectively trained its viewers to be smarter consumers.

Dunkey's community is more centered on humor and social-cultural references, but there are still substantive discussions about gaming in the community. The creation of memes and jokes creates a sense of shared identity, that makes you feel like part of an in-group community with their own language and cultural references. The social-cultural identity makes watching Dunkey videos feel more like participation in a gaming subculture.

The impact of both communities also extends beyond their channels. I have come across references of both Gameranx and Dunkey in game forums, reddit threads, and sometimes just in real life conversations about games. These two creators have been able to imbue themselves within various layers of gaming culture in a way that other traditional media has never been able to achieve.Both creators display unique ways that gaming content can bring people together. Gameranx connects people by focusing on shared practical interests – by helping each other on what good games to play or what bad games to avoid. Dunkey connects people through shared cultural experiences - by laughing at the same jokes and sharing the same memorable moments in gaming.

When They Mess Up

No creator is perfect, and Jake and Dunkey, at times, have made mistakes or voiced opinions about games that have not aged well. What has intrigued me about the design of the channel and the way they both have dealt with these situations is what can be learned from their ways of dealing with being wrong.

Jake has recommended games that have not lived up to the recommendation and has sometimes not thought to warn viewers on issues that arose after release. In his #1 video on "Fallout 76", his coverage was far too optimistic compared to what the game actually was. When problems occur between Jake and recommendations, Gameranx has tended to recognize there is a problem and make a new recommendation after a correction.

The channel has become better in being transparent with correcting and updating their work. Early on, they would not always have a follow-up, but as the channel transitioned to more recent content, they have included updates or clarification, when the first or initial content was not accurate. This will always build trust and never destroy trust in the audience.

Mistakes Dunkey makes are usually either moral mistakes and not correcting why it is not okay or simply about his own taste and not misremembering game content. His negative review of "Octopath Traveler" drew a lot of heat from JRPG fans who were angry he didn't review from their perspective of the experience or understand its tropes. I did not agree with many of Dunkey's perspectives, nonetheless the points he made lead to more thinking of why design decisions can work or not work depending on one's play style.His openness about his disdain of popular games and reasoning behind the statements, has caused some controversy, but it is also the same reason that you can trust him when he gives a positive recommendation. You know he does not simply follow the opinions of the consensus, nor is he worried about the fallout from a review.

Both of these creators show us that being wrong every once in a while has less consequences as long as you are genuine in your opinion and consistent with how you express it. Their audience learns to recalibrate their expectations of what they might get based on each creators unique biases and preferences. And a "wrong" opinion is still a useful one when it comes to making a decision.

The Industry Impact I Have Seen

With years of viewing these channels, I have seen their influence change the larger games industry in ways that a casual viewer might not notice.

One thing that's incredibly obvious in the face of creator economy reaction to marketing strategy is the manner in which developer or publisher marketing approach has shifted. Companies are now straight up courting gaming YouTubers as they know a single positive video by Jake or Dunkey will have more impact than running the same targeted marketing campaign. We have seen some of this change in the manner of positioning and promoting games to focus on an understanding of the type of interaction enabled by content creators.

The impact of creator influence has also led to changes in review embargoes and early access programs specific to the channel or creator community. Publishers have to be aware of, not only the traditional press outlets, but also a real sense of what you would call "content creation," or "creator opinion," when they are talking about how to finalize their review process. In some instances, companies have launched separate early access programs targeted at YouTube creators because they feel they are gaining an audience with completely different behavior than that of traditional media.

I have also started to notice games are being developed or designed different because of content creation.Game developers are increasingly thinking about how their games will be played for a video or stream, in fact some are even adding in mechanics for creating moments to share. Whether this is a good thing or not is subjective; some games may actually feel like they're made for watching and not for playing. But, it does signal to us a genuine influence from gaming content creators.

The economic consequences of creator coverage is real, and a factor no one can deny.Coverage from a premier gaming channel can create a boost in sales, whereas poor coverage can derail a games' future.With this comes accountability for the creators, which both Jake and Dunkey appear to understand and display.

How both creators have dealt with their new-found power serves as a framework for ways gaming content creators can be engaged with the industry- while still preserving their integrity.They have figured out a way to be productive in a commercial structure without being a conduit for the corporation.

What Gaming Content Expects From Its Creators When It is 2025

As I'm revisiting this in 2025, the gaming content scene looks quite different than it did when I started watching Gameranx and videogamedunkey. The creators that survive and thrive in an ever changing field are those who learn how to grow and adapt to shifting platforms and audience interests, while still being true to themselves.

Both channels reflect an interest in thinking about audiences in a way that values long-term relationships over an emphasis of catching growth or following metrics.They have built rapport by being continually authentic and consistent, not through controversy or chasing trends.This is a strategy that is sustainable in ways that more aggressive growth strategies often are not. The parasocial relationships that exist between creators and audiences are especially critical in gaming-related content. Unlike other categories of entertainment, gaming videos are often filmed with creators reacting to experiences that audiences have had or are thinking about having themselves. The relationships are therefore more personal and seem more authentic than relationships with other media.

The way that creators impact gaming culture extends way beyond their subscriber count, or viewer numbers. They have contributed to people's perceptions of games, expectations regarding gaming-related content, and engagement with game culture. Their class of impact on this culture may be their collective significance to society, more so than their value of entertainment.

Both channels are significant sets of data points that emphasize trends in content creation. Regardless of production budgets or algorithmic optimization, these channels demonstrate that strong hallmarks of authenticity and expertise still matter. They have demonstrated that viewing audiences will support creators who provide authentic value instead of creators riding trends and hot takes.

In some undeniable ways, the gaming content one generates is better, more honest, more diverse and, also, more useful than what existed prior to creators and viewers engaging using their own cultural voice. That's a meaningful contribution to gaming culture that extends far beyond the boundaries of individual videos and cultural recommendations. Their styles will and have become interesting ways forward-thinking gaming creators use their own perspectives and approaches to develop their voice and style.

The Personal Connection that Matters

More than a decade of watching these channels later, the most impressive aspect of both channels is that both have managed to maintain very personal connections with audiences while growing to enormous levels. To me, both Jake and Dunkey still feel like people who I could engage in a conversation with about games, even though, I never have, and I probably never will.

It's this recognition of personal connection that gives a successful creator an edge over a media company. From a viewer's perspective, audiences think they know Jake and Dunkey, trust their opinion and process, and invest in their beliefs all because they have developed a relationship through consistent authentic practice over time. The parasocial element isn't problematic due to the value generated by authentic shared interests instead of authentic exhausted personalities.

Both creators, however, have also been conscious to maintain boundaries in their engagement while still providing the personal connection is significant relational capital to value their content. It certainly takes effort to strike that balance, and to ensure balance remains intact, but it is the best long-term framework for sustainable content creation.

In terms of the impact to my own gaming life, it has been far-reaching. My personal gaming experiences and even gaming purchases to participation have changed, but they have also altered my thinking about consumption of entertainment formats outside of gaming, how I consider which media to consume based on friends and whose opinions I value, and expectations of a creator in other formats of content creation.

That is likely the best metric of a successful amount of content creation. Not the number of views or subscribers, but the ways content have genuinely impacted how audiences think about media they love. While today a good deal of online content feels linear and algorithmic, this durability of influence feels rare and valuable in 2023.

It seems like a good lesson to know, whether you are trying to create content, or even just trying to navigate what game to play next.