If I use a stolen credit card to buy a code for your game, eventually there is likely to be a chargeback/refund processed when the credit card owner/company realizes that it was fraudulent. Chargebacks/refunds can sometimes be things that have real penalties associated with them and that can require time investment from you the developer to deal with.

Another, less concrete cost is that of incentivizing bad behavior. If I cannot sufficiently move a certain type of stolen goods, I'm less likely to attempt to steal that type of good again in the future. However, if people choose to pirate a game instead, the bad actor is not rewarded and might realize that he can no longer move that type of product.

Yeah true but the problem with chargeback happens regardless of whether somebody bought the codes or not - unless they bought the codes with stolen credit card, and then the store selling it, not the developer, gets the chargeback. So I don't think this scenario applies here. Developers usually have publishers to deal with things like credit card charges.

But paying the people who steal the cards can only encourage them.

Aside from the cost of credit card charge backs, consider that these are (mostly) customers who think they are buying the game legitimately and just getting a good deal. That money is going straight to g2a instead of the devs/publishers.

Maybe a customer wouldn't buy the game at the full price, but since they're not pirating from the get-go, that shows they are a customer willing to spend money. Maybe they wouldn't buy the same game or as many games, but it's possible they'd still be spending some money on games through legal (but more expensive) means if they knew g2a was just piracy with more steps.

Probably because banks will do chargebacks for those stolen credit card purchases and developers will have to deal with that.

Many years ago I experienced something like that with Paypal where someone bought a license for my software and then immediately made a chargeback claim. And on Paypal unless it is a physical delivery with a tracking number, buyer always wins. I lost some time while communicating with Paypal about the chargeback.

I thought the reason platforms such as Steam collect an outrageous cut of 30% is in at least covering the costs of this fraud, which is in any case still a tiny fraction of that percentage.

Steam itselt dont sell keys to end users at all and ability to sell gifts is really limited. Though game developers / publishers can generate any reasonable amount of Steam keys for free and sell them outside of Steam where Steam itself get absolutely nothing.

This is where most of fraud take place and game developers lose a lot of money on it.

Another unmentioned cost to the developer is the support costs of dealing with someone who believed oneself to be a legitimate customer by obtaining and using a "legit" code previously obtained through not-so-"legit" means. With traditional piracy, the pirates know full well that they're on their own and can expect close to zero support (and in fact outright hostility) from both the original developer and the broader community.

In addition to the points about chargebacks, there's the additive factor of validating purchases on G2A. Consumer A has a successful purchase on G2A, which results in a transaction where they paid money and got a product. They had a positive experience (getting a game for cheaper than what they would pay for it elsewhere), which causes Consumer A to talk to potential consumers n both about a place where they can get the game for cheap, and to disparate the developer for charging so much when someone else will sell it for cheaper.

It damages their brand (vs. piracy, which unless you're using invasive DRM is net neutral at worst, and positive at best), generates negative sales additively (vs. net neutral to positive sales based on word of mouth advertising), and drains the development house's emotional and fiscal capital as they deal with the fallout.

> They had a positive experience (getting a game for cheaper than what they would pay for it elsewhere), which causes Consumer A to talk to potential consumers n both about a place where they can get the game for cheap, and to disparate the developer for charging so much when someone else will sell it for cheaper.

I don't exactly see how this is worse than piracy. isn't it basically the same as "Customer A gets a game for free of {torrent site}. they tell all their friends about {torrent site} and their favorite bittorrent client."? the only way it's different is if most consumers have some moral objection to torrents. in my experience, very few people who work outside of software (or other IP-based industries) really care. they only pay if it's less trouble than torrents.

The argument that I find most persuasive, and that as a fellow game developer resonates with me the most, is that marketplaces like G2A that traffic in stolen goods erodes the perception of value for games. Why would a consumer pay full price for your $25 indie game when they can purchase it for half that on launch day? At best G2A and its partners are exploiting an arbitrage opportunity around regional pricing. More likely and I suspect most often, they are front for money laundering operations that exploit credit card fraud victims, developers, and game enthusiasts who might have their keys revoked.

The chargeback thing, plus most games are fiddly and complicated to pirate these days. (And many multiplayer games can't be pirated at all if you want to play online.) IMO, the #1 reason for the decline of PC game piracy is that Steam makes it so much easier to just buy the game.

But buying a G2A code is almost as easy as buying from Steam. And a lot of people who wouldn't pirate for ethical reasons don't realize it's not legit. So G2A turns loses you sales from people who would otherwise have bought the game legitimately.

I'm sure there is at least some time costs dealing with fraud claims or chargebacks from their payment processor.