Not all Devs are ok with shady key resellers like G2A

[moproblems99]

It's a load of crap that this tool would be 'expensive' to develop. It's also suspect how they are pushing the names of developers who don't want their games to be sold on their service—it's almost like they want blowback from players who don't understand the shadiness of their service and be encouraged to review bomb those developers," Cleveland wrote. "It's also terrible to put the impetus on developers to have to take action with G2A to get this proposal moving in the first place, while G2A profits off gray-market sales and credit card fraud.

https://www.pcgamer.com/subnautica-dev-to-g2a-you-now-owe-us-dollar300000/

 

[Rahnak]

I think it would be hard to find a dev that is ok with G2A in the first place. Apparently it is not uncommon for them to lose money from credit card chargebacks with G2A sales.

Can’t dev/publishers just ban their games from being sold in G2A in the first place?

 

[eidairaman1]

I think it would be hard to find a dev that is ok with G2A in the first place. Apparently it is not uncommon for them to lose money from credit card chargebacks with G2A sales.

Can’t dev/publishers just ban their games from being sold in G2A in the first place?

Yes they can.

 

[64K]

I don't really understand why a Developer/Publisher would sell keys so cheap to the resellers that the reseller can still make a profit selling the keys but I do remember a statement from Ubisoft around 3 months ago that they planned to stop selling keys altogether. From the article:

"The new process is called 'silent key activation' and activates games on platforms like Steam and Uplay automatically rather than giving out codes to retailers and customers. From now on, Ubisoft will only sell games through sites that use SKA."

"instead of giving a retailer a massive list of keys that could theoretically be pinched or resold, no keys actually pass hands."

"Genba (a digital keybank) CEO Matt Murphy told GamesIndustry.biz. "The game is then automatically activated in UPlay. Fanatical doesn't get a key, and neither does the player. They just log into UPlay and the game is there, as if they bought it from the UPlay Store."

Ubisoft is trying to wipe out key reselling with 'silent key activation'

The solution: nobody actually gets any keys.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[Chomiq]

^ Except Ubi is definitely not doing it for consumer's sake.

That being said I only buy games from legit sites, like Steam, GOG, GMG and local distributors. GMG often has good deals for new releases, say 30% off, yet somehow G2A and similar sites manage to counter their offer with something like "50% off". I've heard my share of stories about their shady practices and I refuse to support them, despite "great deals".

 

[Vayra86]

Sorry but handing out keys can simply be done in a better way. Developers have all the tools, they are releasing the product.

Fact is that costs dev time and there isn't an industry best practice so you effectively see that only the big publishers have some sort of effective system in place. Most of it running through their own servers, too, and not some leaky Steam affair.

Its about time indie / smaller dev studios start collaborating if they want to secure their income streams. Its not impossible but they rather each choose to forge their own way, being independant and all. That's a choice. And it may bite them hard. Live and learn, but these Twitter complaints aren't the way to do it, that's for sure.

Now here's what's really happening with key sellers. They are an additional market and first and foremost contain 'sold keys', as in, the license was already paid for somewhere in the chain, albeit at some sort of low price. Its still sales volume devs are afraid to lose.

 

[londiste]

Is that a problem with G2A or credit cards?
I am honestly flabbergasted by how credit cards work. You have some numbers and you get money. No additional checks or anything. In 21st century, really?

In a previous bunch of stories on topic of devs vs G2A a dev said they eventually solved the problem with a purchasing service widget on their page to make the transactions.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Can’t dev/publishers just ban their games from being sold in G2A in the first place?

No, because there's no way of knowing the key was resold on the gray market.

Now here's what's really happening with key sellers. They are an additional market and first and foremost contain 'sold keys', as in, the license was already paid for somewhere in the chain, albeit at some sort of low price. Its still sales volume devs are afraid to lose.

Keys are not legally transferable. They are to be used only by the purchaser or whomever it was gifted to.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1145272774761603072

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1145314954632974337

 

[Vayra86]

No, because there's no way of knowing the key was resold on the gray market.


Keys are not legally transferable. They are to be used only by the purchaser or whomever it was gifted to.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1145272774761603072

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1145314954632974337

Yep. But a legal barrier is not one many people care about, it so seems...

The big publishers understood that years ago as they noticed how music piracy worked out and they started doing DRM.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of DRM in games, but really, the indie devs need it more than anyone and would be best served with a single point of entry for all their game key redemptions, that way they have control, they can analyze the data and watch trends and sudden movements, and act upon it. Its not always having to swing the ban hammer, but information is power. They would be well served with some sort of blockchain that is active at any time a game gets transferred as part of a transaction. If they can trace back that the origin was fraudulent, they can even serve a red box whenever such a game key gets entered to redeem, or they can flag 'bad' keys even prior to purchase.

This would immediately solve the large bulk of service requests with an origin on keysites.

 

[neatfeatguy]

I don't see why developers don't just hold all keys and not hand them out.
Then the developer markets deals/rights for specific sites to sell keys and flag them as verified sites.
Verified sites advertise games for sale.
Consumer pays verified site, verified site processes payment and once confirmation takes place that payment is good, verified site asks developer for key to be sent in and then key is sent directly to the consumer and/or automatically tied to their DRM account.

This would make sure that even a verified site would never holds any keys that aren't sold, so they would never have access to them. Once a key is paid for, a request goes to the developer to release a key that is only given to the consumer.

.....This just seems easy to rectify. Or am I thinking about it all wrong?

 

[Vayra86]

I don't see why developers don't just hold all keys and not hand them out.
Then the developer markets deals/rights for specific sites to sell keys and flag them as verified sites.
Verified sites advertise games for sale.
Consumer pays verified site, verified site processes payment and once confirmation takes place that payment is good, verified site asks developer for key to be sent in and then key is sent directly to the consumer and/or automatically tied to their DRM account.

This would make sure that even a verified site would never holds any keys that aren't sold, so they would never have access to them. Once a key is paid for, a request goes to the developer to release a key that is only given to the consumer.

.....This just seems easy to rectify. Or am I thinking about it all wrong?

Apparently outsourcing it to some sort of platform or sales point is still the way to go. You have to consider, I think, the limited reach of doing it all by yourself. People need to know about you and that is a problem. The next problem is having to actually facilitate transactions through your portal, and then serve the files from somewhere. There are a LOT of countries with a lot of rules and regulations in place as well. The current contraption is a mix of key sellers and a varied mass of distributors handling mostly Steam keys, some GOG keys (but those tend to be much more expensive), so really, the developer itself is not doing any of the distribution or sales.

That is why I'd advocate indie devs unite, create a fund and develop something they can manage together.

 

[Deleted member 67555]

Erhm errrrg errrff cough I don't give a fuck cough as long cough errrufff hcckkk sphew they work.

Listen... Every single part of capitalism exists to screw you over... You're not rich for a reason....duh

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't see why developers don't just hold all keys and not hand them out.
Then the developer markets deals/rights for specific sites to sell keys and flag them as verified sites.
Verified sites advertise games for sale.
Consumer pays verified site, verified site processes payment and once confirmation takes place that payment is good, verified site asks developer for key to be sent in and then key is sent directly to the consumer and/or automatically tied to their DRM account.

This would make sure that even a verified site would never holds any keys that aren't sold, so they would never have access to them. Once a key is paid for, a request goes to the developer to release a key that is only given to the consumer.

.....This just seems easy to rectify. Or am I thinking about it all wrong?

There are three ways keys end up in the gray market:

1) Free keys the developer gave out to the press, streamers, at conferences, etc. It's part of their promotion blitz which they are increasingly discovering that a lot of these keys end up on the graymarket so they're doing much, much less of it.

2) Keys that were bought with stolen credit cards. The gray market is used to launder dirty money. Store gets charged back when the credit card company discovers the theft and the charge back fees (usually about $30) + charge are subtracted from the publisher's earnings for the period from the store. The thief gets away with a few dollars while the publisher gets stuck with a $30 bill on top of the lost sale.

3) Some people exploit free events (giveaways) or near free events (Humble Bundles). They buy up lots of keys with the express purpose of reselling them on the graymarket when the event is over. This is why there aren't many of these events anymore (except at Epic Games where there is no keys to be exchanged: Epic buys every game on behalf of the purchaser and its tied to the purchasers EGS account with no way to transfer it.

#1 and #3, publishers have control over; #2 they do not. #2 is the most harmful to the industry and the reason why they'd rather people pirate than support the gray market. If no one bought from the gray market then it would no longer exist as an instrument to launder money. Buying from the gray market is supporting criminals, not publishers/developers.