342
Minecraft players outraged as Microsoft deletes accounts that weren't transitioned
(www.tomshardware.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
342 points (96.5% liked)
Games
16748 readers
1431 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Is it that expensive to just keep a database of codes that can be redeemed for people who haven't migrated yet? Like humble bundle keeping track of what you buy? Or even lemmy with comments linked to users?
They could handle it through support. Remove the automated process and do an email verification check and support could manually migrate the license.
I totally understand Microsoft's desire to remove obsolete services like account transitions, but they should still have a mechanism for resurrecting old accounts if you can prove you are the original account holder.
They need more than email verification. Some privacy minded people signed up with throwaway email, but probably have other proof of ownership
A proper corporate database with the security it needs and the amount of people accessing it (remember how many people bought Minecraft) yes it would be expensive to have multiple databases doing the same thing.
No it wouldn't, millions of people bought it but the vast majority migrated, even if there were still millions of people to migrate this wouldn't get hit very hard because people would not migrate all in one go, so any simple master+slave database system would work, even an SQLite is capable of handling this volume. The total cost of this would be less than $100 per year if they wanted to outsource everything (which is essentially nothing for Microsoft), if they used any of their existing servers for it the coat would be a lot less possibly very close to 0.
Its Microsoft - they offer multiple DBaaS themselves.
But it costs a lot more than $100 in man hours to properly propose, approve, and implement any production system.
Yes, but it also costs as much to sunset a system, so they spend that money regardless.
If people haven't transferred would they be accessing it? Not much incentive for people who already transfered to go back to just claim a code, and people who haven't yet probably aren't going to be logging in all the time.