Not just developers who need butter on their bread, they're not the sole persons whose livelihood is worth legal protection when there's still reasonably something which could be called a market position for the game.
Hader said:
Why do people say these things?
Piracy. Is. Illegal.
Doesn't matter what moral label you try to attach to it to justify it, that one fact isn't changing.
Laws and ethics do not always match up.
While it will never be fully "okay" to break a legitimately and democratically passed law, there's considerable ethical difference in someone downloading a game commonly sold on their home market (or otherwise easily available through digital distribution), or some Chinese dude downloading a French independent film that will never ever see release in China, and thus never gain any sort of market position there for the law to reasonably protect (i.e. fulfil the purpose it had in the first place).
The former can be condemned for hurting the interests of developers and retailers, while the latter can only be "condemned" based on an abstract notion of compliance with even inane and pointless parts of laws being part of the social contract. Both are illegal, and both are to some degree wrong, but they're
not equally wrong. Much like a pedestrian crossing for red light isn't the same situation in a busy city at noon, where all kinds of chaos can result from it, or in the middle of nowhere at 2 a.m, with plenty of light sources and no cars in sight anywhere. This despite it being regulated by the same law.
So laws are laws, but violations are not simply violations.