1241
Piracy > resellers (lemmy.ca)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/piracy@lemmy.ml
184 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 42 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

Most of the keys are obtained illegally (stolen accounts and/or credit cards) so eventually the money gets taken back. So not only was the game stolen but the indie has to go through processing the takeback which costs them money on top of it.

And since the takeback issue can occur the person purchasing could lose their game without even realizing it and then complain to the devs when it wasn't even their fault.

You're basically double-dipping and ensuring that actual costs are involved.

edit: brain fuzzy. Chargeback is the word.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    I've also heard that this is a myth, and while there might be some fraudulent purchases, the majority are just picked up in other regions where games are cheaper and maybe during sales. Devs who tell you to pirate their game instead of using resellers may be actually making more money off resellers than they think, but there isn't really any way to confirm it. Without a mass study.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It's hard to know because both sides are arguing that it's 100% their side. Game companies are claiming it's basically all pirated keys. G2A (in court) used to argue that it was basically no pirated keys. The truth is somewhere in the middle but nobody is talking.

    In some cases, the fraudulent purchase route is less profitable than just buy-selling across countries and abusing sales. I can't imagine in those cases that we're looking at fraudulent purchases.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Exactly, devs need to prove that resellers are an overall net negative on their income before they can use this as a talking point. Fraud happens in every industry, the existence of fraud doesn't make a service net negative overall.

    For what it's worth, I've used G2A plenty of times for games I otherwise wouldn't have purchased and I've never had an issue once.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    ....Do they?

    I feel like if the person is telling you to pirate the game, a method that is 100% confirmed to provide no money to the dev, they probably are already actively feeling money drain from the other method

    Like telling someone to pirate your game is a pretty extreme argument against resellers. I don't think it's a myth, and while a mass study would be good, there's just more evidence against at the moment. I think the resellers have more to prove than vica versa.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Unfortunately that's spotty evidence at best. Game developers generally don't sell their own keys, they sell them through distribution platforms like Steam. Gamers and resellers both pick up keys from distribution platforms. A percentage of these are legit, a percentage are fraudulent, however the game dev has no way to actually tell:

    1. How many legit sales are to resellers
    2. How many fraudulent sales are to resellers

    Distribution platforms don't make you check a box that says "I'm a reseller", so there's no way to know if the net income from legitimate sales to resellers is less than the cost of fraudulent sales to resellers. The only thing game devs have to rely on is signal from chargebacks, and a chargeback makes a lot more noise than a legitimate sale.

    I think it's very possible that the few devs that tell you to pirate instead of using resellers are misinformed, and of course they are, because they don't own their own distribution line. Fraudulent sales cause more noise than legitimate sales which causes people to jump on the "pirate over resellers".

    But regardless of which side of this argument is correct, telling people to boycott an entire sub-industry based on claims with speculative evidence is ridiculous.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    I mean,

    I still feel that a dev willing to take a lost sale over a resale, still says more than just saying they're misinformed.

    And at the end of the day, resell is supposed to be a cheaper way to say "I bought it". And at the end of the day, devs are saying "If anything, it's worse for us"

    I don't think it's ridiculous. I think resellers are more needing to prove their legitimacy in this case.

    The thing I find most ridiculous honestly, is that you seem to be under the assumption that the devs aren't already getting noisy chargebacks. Like this whole thing sprouted from nothing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago

    I don't think it's ridiculous. I think resellers are more needing to prove their legitimacy in this case.

    Claims made without evidence do not have to be disputed with evidence. The burden of proof is on the party making the claims.

    Everything else you wrote has already been addressed in my previous comment, did you actually read it before responding?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent