Drug Dealer Simulator Calls Out Its Own Publisher For Schedule 1 Investigation

Summary

Drug Dealer Simulator publisher Movie Games recently launched an investigation into Schedule 1 for copyright infringement.
In response, Schedule 1 fans launched a review bombing campaign against the game, dragging its score down to ‘Overwhelmingly Negative’ on Steam.
Movie Games issued a response, stating that it had no choice but to launch the investigation and that there is no lawsuit yet, but developer Byterunners has since hit back at its own publisher, echoing the community’s disappointment.

Indie game Drug Dealer Simulator has been embroiled in controversy over the last month after its publisher, Movie Games, launched an investigation into Schedule 1 for copyright infringement.

Fans took out their anger by launching a review bombing campaign against Drug Dealer Simulator, plummeting its score to ‘Overwhelmingly Negative’ in mere hours (it has since risen back up to ‘Mostly Positive’). With the game’s reputation being dragged down as a result of the investigation, its publisher was pressured to issue a response, clarifying that “there is no lawsuit”.

Schedule 1 customer with calculator behind them

In My Day, We Played Schedule 1 On A Graphing Calculator And We Liked It

Back at school, old calculators were the best way to experience a game like Schedule 1

It explained that it had to launch an “investigation into the nature of similarities between the games” due to it being a publicly traded company, otherwise it could face “severe consequences for negligence.” Nonetheless, Drug Dealer Simulator developer Byterunners hit back against its own publisher, voicing support for Schedule 1 (as reported by Windows Central).

“We Have Expressed Our Concerns And Opinions To Them Directly”

In Byterunner’s statement, addressing its own players and Schedule 1 fans, it explained that it does not own the Drug Dealer Simulator IP, but that it has spoken to Movie Games about the investigation in private, echoing the community’s disappointment. It admitted that Schedule 1 was “probably heavily inspired” by its game, but that it still has “its own vibe, freshness, and ideas” which, while derived from DDS, also “expand on it” to create “its own shape and style.”

Byterunners bluntly said that it doesn’t care about the issue of copyright, and that the game industry in fact thrives on competing studios taking inspiration from one another, helping to “create and improve genres”. After all, FPS games began life as Doom clones, and in recent years, we’ve enjoyed countless Soulslikes that pull liberally from FromSoftware’s work.

Unfortunately, it’s not up to Byterunners, and while publisher Movie Games hasn’t filed a lawsuit yet, “action will […] be taken if infringement is found”. Byterunners, however, revealed that it “would not pursue any legal actions against Schedule 1” if it were their decision, and that they hope this will “end well for everyone”.

Drug Dealer Simulator Developer Byterunners’ Full Statement On Schedule 1

“Dear fans and communities of both Drug Dealer Simulator and Schedule 1,

After managing the ongoing drama on our side, analyzing the situation, listening to various opinions and feedback, and having multiple discussions both internally in the studio and with our publisher, we wanted to provide an update on our stance regarding the Schedule 1 infringement investigation launched by our publisher — Movie Games S.A.

We want to state that, despite the fact that we do see many similarities between the games, and that some aspects of Schedule 1 were probably heavily inspired by DDS, we as the developers do not feel like we are being robbed by anyone. Mind that we are not lawyers, and we base the following on our personal feelings about the matter. In our opinion, S1 has its own vibe, freshness, and ideas that derive from the concept of DDS1, but expand on it and bring them in its own shape and style. Franky, we don’t care how this relates to copyrights and fair competition laws, but we think these kinds of inspirations are abundant in game development, create and improve genres, and — even if they sometimes cross a few lines — are, in general, a good thing for the industry and gaming as a whole.

We base our stance on our personal opinions on the matter as developers and gamers. If we have a choice in this, we would not pursue any legal actions against Schedule 1 in any shape or form. Considering we do not own the DDS IP, we do not have direct influence over the decisions surrounding the investigation or our publisher’s policy; however, we have expressed our concerns and opinions to them directly.

We will actively work on voicing our stance during this investigation. We want this to end well for everyone and do not want anyone affected to face this kind of negativity, fear, or hatred. That’s not why we make games, and that’s not what we stand for.”