Developers of Drug Dealer Simulator Criticize Publisher’s Probing into Schedule I

Just last week, Drug Dealer Simulator made its debut on Xbox, but the main buzz wasn’t about it landing on a new console. Instead, it’s the controversy involving Schedule I, a game that’s taken the Steam charts by storm, that’s stealing the spotlight.

While Schedule I is riding high with impressive sales and player numbers leading the chart, the developers of Drug Dealer Simulator, known as Byterunners, find themselves entangled in drama they didn’t foresee. Though they’re being review-bombed by Schedule I enthusiasts, the Byterunners team assures they aren’t personally affected by Schedule I’s success, nor by the notion that their game may have sparked some inspiration.

The accusations of intellectual property infringement are prompted not by Byterunners, but by their publisher, Movie Games S.A. As a company traded publicly, they’re legally bound to look into these matters.

In a statement shared by Byterunners, they addressed their fans, “Dear fans and communities of both Drug Dealer Simulator and Schedule I, after analyzing the situation, considering various opinions, and debating internally and with our publisher, we wanted to clarify our position on the infringement investigation initiated by Movie Games S.A.

“We acknowledge the similarities between the games, and there’s a chance Schedule I was heavily inspired by DDS. But as developers, we don’t feel wronged by anyone. Our perspective is less about legalities and more about appreciation for inspiration crossing into different games, enhancing genres, and pushing boundaries—even if they blur lines occasionally. It’s this kind of creative spark that propels the gaming industry forward.”

They continued, “We want an amicable resolution for all involved and don’t wish for anyone to experience negativity. That’s not what gaming is about for us.”

For many, the rapid success of Schedule I, achieving over 450,000 concurrent players, epitomizes the recent trend where indie games, developed with minimal buzz, suddenly capture massive attention.

Created by TylerVGS from Australia with collaborators for design and music, Schedule I mirrors the gameplay loop of Drug Dealer Simulator — beginning as a small-time dealer looking to build an empire. Despite its cartoon style, it’s as addictive as ever.

Drug Dealer Simulator takes a grittier approach to similar themes, a creation of Polish studio Byterunners and published by Movie Games S.A. The publisher has been vocal, stating, “there is no lawsuit,” but they continue to evaluate the two games’ similarities, drawing negative reactions from Schedule I fans on Steam.

Games like Schedule I are shining an uncomfortable light on the gaming industry. Amidst growing rifts between indie hits and big AAA titles, Schedule I disrupts market expectations, challenging notions of what succeeds commercially.

While Movie Games S.A. may need to investigate legal aspects, their actions potentially jeopardize both games’ triumphs. As Byterunners deals with unintended fallouts, negative publicity complicates their position, impacting their Xbox presence.

Increasingly, we see legal proceedings used to suppress creativity. Cases like Nintendo versus Pocketpair and Warner Brothers’ patented Nemesis system illustrate a disturbing trend where the focus is less on innovation, more on safeguarding existing interests.

Such disputes could damage the indie scene, making developers hesitant to innovate for fear of legal repercussions. The gaming world must rethink its approach to IP and creativity, or risk losing what truly makes games unique: their originality.

So, what are your thoughts? Is the corporate stronghold a necessary evil, or does it stifle creativity? I’d love to hear your perspectives below.