They had no problems taking everyone’s money. Maybe companies should limit the number of sales when deploying a product tied to services they operate and need to scale.
They had no problems taking everyone’s money. Maybe companies should limit the number of sales when deploying a product tied to services they operate and need to scale.
You know Microsoft isn’t, like, one individual dude right?
deleted by creator
and Melinda Apple
deleted by creator
No, it’s a multinational 3.1 trillion dollar company that has many in house resources it could pull on for a project like this. If they’re gonna sell a product with this kind of server reliance built in, it’s on them to actually hold up their end of the bargain instead of “oh oops looks like the game is just too much of a success guys”.
I think their point is that Microsoft literally had all the information they needed to prevent this from happening and they just didn’t because they were incompetent or some other human reason that had nothing to do with server capacity or or a missing Ethernet cable. There was nothing “unknown” here.
Scaling to meet demand is literally their job. Supposedly best, which is why they have been awarded military contracts.
They lost situational awareness, or they never had it.
Yeah that was exactly my feelings, I’m actually impressed you got that from my low effort vitreol haha
It’d be hilarious if one of the people negotiating one of those military contracts went “well, apparently your company can’t even handle scaling up a video game made by your own company, so we no longer have the confidence to rely on your product. We might offer a chance at the contract again in ten years, if no other incidents shake our confidence again.”