Developer says game key resale fraud cost it $450,000

Question is why did they target a small indie developer. Why didnt they hit someone a bit bigger to get more profit.

In TinyBuild's case, Nichiporchik claims fraudsters purchased thousands of keys from the studio's own store using stolen credit cards, incurring a "chargeback" process wherein credit card processors recoup fraudulent transactions from vendors.

"I’d start seeing thousands of transactions, and our payment provider would shut us down within days," Nichoporchik explained.

This says they were sold off TinyBuilds website so why didnt they solely sell through Steam ? Sounds like their site wasnt protected from automated attack.
Noticed most key sites now have the human verification check so obviously they didnt.

Can't help but think this is just one of those cases of their site being "attacked" in this way using an automated credit paying app/software that has just shown up the poor security on their ecommerce software.
 
Never liked the look of G2A though. Always looked a bit dodgy to me. Paying them a bit extra to make sure the key you just bought will definitely work? No thanks.
Most key sites offer a similar service these days. Kinguin has its own version of G2A Shield. Honestly, I don't see the problem with them doing that either. It seems like a good thing for peace of mind for those who want it, and no different to sites selling insurance on physical goods.

I've never used it myself though, as I generally always choose seller with really good feedback, even if it means paying a few more pennies over the absolute cheapest listing, and haven't been scammed yet.
 
Yes, it's very tough.

I used to work at a company that sold digitally distributed games and a lot of them were via Steam key. The majority of our time was spent combating fraudulent purchases and frankly it was a mess (think stolen PayPal accounts, fraudulent card usage etc.).

Steam were awful and never gave any assistance - we often had to get publishers to lean on them on our behalf and even then it was very rare we could get keys cancelled. Eventually we took to manually registering fraudulently-purchased keys on throwaway accounts just so the people committing the crime would have nothing to sell.

No better way was found? :-o
 
This says they were sold off TinyBuilds website so why didnt they solely sell through Steam ?

Steam takes a significant cut of the sale.

This whole thing really isn't surprising; in much the same way as eBay is a haven for fraud, stolen/dodgy goods so are these CD key websites. It's genuinely perplexing how people on here can continue to claim to be so naive about it.
 
just block the keys and stop whining.
only thing they have to decide, is weather to try and implement something that retrospectively blocks the game, as card chargeback might happen after game activation.

even without post blocking, sellers would soon get lots of feedback and either go elsewhere or have to keep changing their username which then leads to less sales as people wouldn't trust low feedback.

Question is why did they target a small indie developer. Why didnt they hit someone a bit bigger to get more profit.
.

they probably do target everyone.
also how many sell keys? its not a huge amount. I imagine if you buy on steam and there's a chargeback steam would block the game.
 
Last edited:
I know G2A have had bad rep for there marketplace but wow this Indie company is clearly at fault here.

"own store using stolen credit cards" - This is a thing across the internet on every eCommerce website, They should have enforced 3d secure on all transactions and had good fraud protection in place.

The developers were clearly out of depth, Tried to save money and make more profit in the process got screwed by not knowing, should have used Humble Bundle or something similar where protection is already in place.
 
What I cant understand is why they allowed large volume purchasing from their site, also why didn't they use a commerce platform that alerted them to large sales as well. The list of options is endless to help control this possible issue.

There just seems to be some things they could have done to help mitigate some of this occurring. I'm not saying its their fault but whining about platforms that sell gets no where in the long run.

As others say: Black list the keys and move on.
 
Is this like when record companies claim every track downloaded is a lost sale?

They appear to be assuming that everyone who paid less than half retail for the game on G2A would have paid over twice as much to buy it direct, which simply isn't the case at all.
 
Most key sites offer a similar service these days. Kinguin has its own version of G2A Shield. Honestly, I don't see the problem with them doing that either. It seems like a good thing for peace of mind for those who want it, and no different to sites selling insurance on physical goods.

I've never used it myself though, as I generally always choose seller with really good feedback, even if it means paying a few more pennies over the absolute cheapest listing, and haven't been scammed yet.

Paying extra to ensure your digital code works. Sounds legit to me.
/Not.
 
Paying extra to ensure your digital code works. Sounds legit to me.
/Not.
But that isn't what it is. You buy the key from a third party. If that third party scams you, G2A/Kinguin/whoever step in, eat the loss on your behalf and refund you (within five minutes apparently). I'm truly baffled as to what your issue is with that, especially as I noted that I've never used it once and have never had a key that didn't work fine, negating the possible "if you don't pay you'll get a bad key" scam insinuation off the bat.
 
But that isn't what it is. You buy the key from a third party. If that third party scams you, G2A/Kinguin/whoever step in, eat the loss on your behalf and refund you (within five minutes apparently). I'm truly baffled as to what your issue is with that, especially as I noted that I've never used it once and have never had a key that didn't work fine, negating the possible "if you don't pay you'll get a bad key" scam insinuation off the bat.

Do not be so gullible.

If I buy from Ebay, and the seller does not give what is advertised, I get a refund.

I do not have to "pay extra" to make sure of that.

Defence of that practice is simply nonsensical at best.

G2A as a responsible introducer should refund you without problem then take it up with the seller.

Do you really think they "eat the loss" that easily?

G2A do not allow you to "cash out" your takings immediately. This is so if there are any problems, the seller does not get the cash.

Knowing this is the case, why then charge the customer MORE MONEY to give them their refund if they do not get what is sold to them? G2A still have the money in their account.
 
Last edited:
Paying extra to ensure your digital code works. Sounds legit to me.
/Not.

Exactly. No one can defend their crappy decision to start selling 'insurance'. Obviously you can get around being scammed if you pay by PayPal as you just report them and PayPal refund you despite complaints via email from G2A/Kinguin. Been there, done that. Don't be surprised when PayPal isn't an option anymore.
 
Do not be so gullible.
You always know it's going to be a quality post when it starts off with a petty insult. :D

If I buy from Ebay, and the seller does not give what is advertised, I get a refund.

I do not have to "pay extra" to make sure of that.
But that certainly hasn't always been the case. I know from bitter experience that in the past you'd only get a refund if Paypal could secure the money back from the seller who scammed you. Perhaps things are different now. I wouldn't know, as I haven't been scammed on eBay in a long time. But even so, what does that prove exactly? That eBay are a massive behemoth of a company that can afford to do that as a matter of course? That eBay is a more reputable and safer place to buy than grey market key sites? I could have told you that. Some smarter breeds of goat too perhaps.

Defence of that practice is simply nonsensical at best.

G2A as a responsible introducer should refund you without problem then take it up with the seller.
I disagree. I'm sorry that dissenting opinions are so nonsensical to you, but I'll try to clarify. G2A/Kinguin/whoever would have to spend a lot of time and money implementing the kind of all-encompassing mediation solutions that eBay/Paypal have. Perhaps they simply cannot afford to employ hundreds of people to work on disputes between sellers and customers the way that eBay/Paypal can. Certainly the fact that they're a mere speck of dust in terms of size by comparison isn't in question, and I'm sure there's no doubt either that developing, operating and staffing such systems costs eBay/Paypal a hell of a lot of money (that obviously they see as being worth it to ensure trust in their platform).

My opinion is that I'm perfectly happy to accept the terms laid out. That if I want to have that degree of protection, I need to pay a fee for it. I feel that's entirely reasonable within the context that investigating potential fraud costs money, and that not every company can be eBay and have their resources. If you disagree, you're free to not buy from them. That seems like the most simple thing in the world to me. They don't try and hide any of this and only let you know that you're **** out of luck after your money is hanging in the balance. They clearly state exactly what will happen. It's then up to you to decide what you do with that information. I choose to use them (and not pay their fee, of my own free will, knowing the risks). You may decide differently. That's absolutely fine.

Do you really think they "eat the loss" that easily?

G2A do not allow you to "cash out" your takings immediately. This is so if there are any problems, the seller does not get the cash.

Knowing this is the case, why then charge the customer MORE MONEY to give them their refund if they do not get what is sold to them? G2A still have the money in their account.
The mechanics of how their system works are irrelevant. Ultimately a claim of fraud against a seller has to be investigated. It's one person's word against another's, and in the case of something like a digital key that somebody can use immediately and then claim was used when they received it, even more difficult. That investigation requires a(t least one) human being, takes time and as a result costs money. G2A's (and the other sites which use the exact same system) position on whether they're willing to spend that time and money is made perfectly clear. Then it's up to you to decide whether you want to pay, not pay or just avoid their site entirely and take your business elsewhere.

So again, not seeing the problem here. I'm not going to argue about it any more, because there's no "right" answer, just a choice. I'm going to choose to continue using sites like G2A. You're free not to, since you obviously disagree with their policies on an idealogical level. I see your point of view. I won't write it off as "nonsensical" because I don't agree with it. I get the position that by letting scammers just get away with it in any scenario is bad. That's a perfectly fine and wonderful ideal, spoiled only by the practical realities of running such a business.

Anyway, what a wonderful world, where we can all make our own decisions based on clear information like adults, without having to resort to name calling towards people who choose a different path.

/;)
 
G2A is established in the FULL knowledge they are reselling dodgy keys.

Since when was there a second hand market for digitally activated CD-Keys? There has not been since the death of the physical retail box.

Nobody buys a Digital CD Key and then thinks..actually...I'll just go on and sell this now.
 
Their games are on Steam by the looks of it, they obviously want to try and sell games at other sites as well though.

Don't know why anyone would be surprised about this, it's been known for a long time that the way a lot of keys sold on sites like G2A are obtained isn't legal, but game companies don't like to blacklist the keys because that just harms their reputation when "innocent" players get their accounts removed.

I think it was Ubi that removed a bunch of people's games because codes were bought with stolen credit cards, then when people complained Ubi gave them the games anyway.
That's what Ubisoft claims, but I wouldn't believe a word of what they said even if they were reading out the contents of my birth certificate.
 
They need to improve the vetting process for either selling blocks of keys, or limit the IP address / number of keys which can be purchased from a single location / credit card.

I fail to see how this is anyone elses fault tbh, if you don't want fraud, then stop operating a system which makes it easy.
 
Back
Top Bottom