Hot Take: Theorist hasn't changed or gotten worse, some people just don't like the hosts, and the topics where going downhill even before Matt left.
I don't really want to right a whole essay on this, its just a thought I had that I need to discuss. I think that generally speaking, Game theory and the other channels have not gotten worse because mat left or even because the company was sold, (as for the second one, Matt was THE youtube business guy on youtube for a long time, and i thoroughly believe that he simply wouldn't relinquish his entire brand like that, plus, things don't always get worse when sold. For instance veritasium the popular science channel was sold off and it has been releasing more bangers than ever however this isn't really my point.) I think that what changed was exactly what it looks like, the hosts and the topics.
I'll start with the hosts. From personal experience and a little bit of scrolling, I have seen a lot of people complain about the new hosts, but I have also seen a common factor throughout... Alot of people DO like food theory and/or gt live. Coincidence. Possibly. Or... Matpat was popular because he was familiar. Heck he himself did a theory on how familiarity builds attraction, and attraction ISNT just romantic. I mean be honest, if you DIDNT know matpat, he would be a crazy dude that has an annoying voice and trashes on your favorite franchises ( hence people that dislike mat REALLY disliked him) So... Why are food theory and gt live still likeable. Simple. They have been on camera in person doing things expressing themselves becoming FAMILIAR, almost ( or in ashes case EVERY) video. I think if a stranger walked up and saw game theory video from 2021 and a game theory video from today having never heard of the channels or people, they wouldn't see a huge difference besides the voice. Rather the fact that the hosts personality is given a chance to shine through in different mediums is what makes the videos enjoyable.
One other reason I think this is plausible is that matpat WAS on every channel. His personality was able to be near fully realized this way, at the cost of his time. Matpat quickly became familiar because you saw him on gt live, than on food theory than on style and film and game theory, he just had a bigger window. The new hosts have a smaller window.
The other thing I think changed is the topics. I actually think the topics changed long before mat left, and I think it's not cause of management...it's because of media. Because now, because it gets coverage EVERYTHING has a story now. And because of that every new theory isn't scientific explanation of Mario's height, or a deep dive into the portal problem, with experiments and math, which some people really want, but rather a much less satisfying exploration of literary speculation and symbolism along with a recap and guess what will happen next. And I don't want to spend to long on this part because I actually think mat literally predicted this. First he predicted video games becoming more story driven because his theories ( I think the video is called "are my theories ruining video games" or something) and than again he predicted that that shifts effect on their videos is what made us hate them ( this one was specifically referencing fnaf, and is titled "why you hate my fnaf theories" or something")
Anyway, that's my long winded take, any thoughts. I'd love to discuss, even if you just want to tell me how wrong I am.
Edit Copy of reply I sent to commentor to elaborate:
Noted. While I would like to remain civil. I can see your side here. Many people DO like the hosts. But they don't like the topics. However I suppose my main argument isn't that the hosts are disliked, rather that the hosts have been put into a role in which no one likes the topics they are talking about, so they just... Won't watch. And my argument is furthermore that the topics are NOT what determines the quality of the video, because just cause a topic isn't interesting, doesn't mean it isn't presented well. Building from there, I think the QUALITY hasn't gone down, rather the topics have fallen out of favor. and to even FURTHER build upon that I am implying that the lore topics are not becoming more common because of the fact that they where tooken over by private equity, or because of money. Because if that where the case they would probably prefer math and science over lore, as a calculator and a spreadsheet can do math, but can't analyze a story for symbolism. Rather the topics that they go over are simply due to a combination of the fact that games are REALLY leaning into the lore aspect, (and the algorithm demands NEW content about NEW things, not Marios gravitational acceleration) and that the algorithm rewards it which remember, is a creators strongest signal of what thier community likes and dislikes.
Put simply, I suppose is should have elaborated to suggest that I'm not saying people are simply wrong and just don't like the hosts, it's that the hosts have been put in a situation that makes it harder to like them, and that's mainly because games have continually leaned hard into lore to gain exposure pushing the algorithm to punish any other types of theory in a feedback loop.
However I do see how my original post could come acrossed differently.