You may all think that one of the worst problems of this website is the bubble system. "Where are my bubbles?" "I didn't do anything wrong!" "The system DEFINITELY needs to go." But I feel that there is a problem just as bad, if not worse, than the bubble system. The Agree/Disagree system.
How many times have you received random and anonymous disagrees for something that didn't even make sense to disagree on? How many times have you made multiple points in a comment only to receive disagrees without knowing what exactly people were disagreeing with?
I submit to you all that the system needs revamping or tweaking. It hinders conversations and allows people to make "hit-and-run" mouse clicks. Why try to defend a claim, make a point, or make sense in general when you can mash a button that says, "I don't like what you're saying" more than it means "I disagree with you". The main reason, I think, of the ridiculous Disagree spammage is the anonymity.
What we need, as a first step at least, is to be able to view the names of the users that have agreed and disagreed with us. Or maybe at least the last three or four users that did so (similar to the "Approve" option for pending news and such). Personally, I would be in favor of scrapping the system altogether, but I know that's unlikely to happen, so I want to compromise. You probably haven't noticed, but I don't use the agree/disagree buttons at all, even when I have a response. My ideas are in my posts, not in a mounding digital value.
As far as it's working right now, it mainly acts as something to hide behind when one has nothing meaningful to say. A user will almost always have MUCH more disagrees than they have replies. I initially created an account on this website to have conversations, but often times, that can boil down to me just assuming that numbers will "have to do" in lieu of real communication.
It's an inhibitor to idea sharing and needs to be reworked just as badly as the bubble system, I feel. Some of you who may comment on this blog will receive disagrees (and agrees), but won't know why you got them; as goes the tradition on N4G.
So, am I the only one who thinks some changes are in order?
Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.
Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.
To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.
The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.
Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.
15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.
These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse
The charity event will be streamed live from Gamescom in August.
Thanks to the slip-up of an artist working on the title, we now have more evidence that a new Injustice game is in the works.
I think that the Agrees/Disagress should be hidden until the comment reaches a certain number of Agrees/Disagrees. For example: Even if a comment has, lets say, 4 Disagrees, Well nobody can see those 4 disagrees but once the comment gets 5 disagrees than you will be able to see the disagrees. I hope I'm making sense.
I think the word "Who" next to agree and disagree would work. With that, you'd be able to see who clicked what. Same for the bubble up/down buttons.
I personally only rarely use those buttons. I prefer posting a reply, and then only when I feel I have something to add whether I agree with the statement or not.
I pressed agree with you both as you both have good idea's that I can agree with.;)
You now know who has given you both 1 agree each.
I do like where you both are coming from, something better is needed.
Agreed about the "who" use with the agree/disagree system would be better, or even as you say maybe just show the last few people who did so as opposed to a massive list. But really you shouldn't care too much about the disagree trolls that much since that doesn't actually really do anything to you (i.e. stop you from replying more like if you lose bubbles, nor does it show up in your profile, at least I think it doesn't). On the subject of it after noticing a number of users myself who have just the one bubble but still manage to constantly troll their way around the site and around articles I was thinking it might be a decent idea if they would be temp suspended from posting comments for a while if they continue to get bubbled down for good reasons, since even though they can't reply they still get their way around into a heap of articles just writing stupid and idiotic comments usually flaming someone or something and starting off a fanboy war.