First off, I'm dismissing out of hand all that you wrote, since you can't be arsed to even discover what it is you are commenting on. ggg calls it a "terms of use" not service. So, you start off with a fallacy and it gets worse from there.
Second, here's a synopsis of
Express Guarantee, one of the three fundamental aspects of a basic contract, and how the law deals with things from wikipedia
quote In contract law, a warranty means a guarantee or promise which provides assurance by one party to the other party that specific facts or conditions are true or will happen. This factual guarantee may be enforced regardless of materiality which allows for a legal remedy if that promise is not true or followed.
[Athough] some warranties run with a product so that a manufacturer makes the warranty to a consumer with which the manufacturer has no direct contractual relationship, a warranty [therefore] may be express or implied, depending on whether the warranty is explicitly provided (typically written) and the jurisdiction. Warranties may also state that a particular fact is true at one point in time or that the fact will be continue into the future (a "promissory" or continuing warranty).
So, what this equates to is fair dealing, that a promise, and an express purpose and guarantee made (which is what a contract is, by definition) that something (be it gg points, Steam bux, MTX, cosmetics, pets, stash tabs etc, are purchased. I can guarantee you that your having purchased "ggg points" is never an end-game) having been purchased has a use, is designed for that purpose, will be useful for that purpose, and isn't designed to immediately stop being useful, so that my only remedy is to purchase more of the product or service to finish what I was doing.
You'll notice the wiki I referred to lists jurisdictional limitation on contract law verbiage. Where I live, a finding in my favor would then subtend the US atty for my district taking over the case.
As for your other contention that it's a lease, it's nothing of the sort. A valid efficacious lease requires a list of property/ies being leased
by name, and a beginning/commencement and end dates for said lease, and an amount that is remitted as consideration that at the end of the lease, the leaser would not expect back. The fundamental aspect of trade and mercantile endeavours is the exchange,
permanently of goods, and the deliverance of a service, to which a subsequent reversal of process could not be performed legally.
You make a bunch of other fallacious comments as do the other jackasses in this thread, suffice to say The Uniform Commercial Code of the US takes care of these sorts of issues, and "terms of use" or service, etc have been found not to be efficacious or enforceable all over the US.
For your perusal,
Enforceability Of Online Terms Of Use: Guidance From The Ninth Circuit - Corporate/Commercial Law - United States