A significant development in the gaming world is currently unfolding, one that Digital Tech Explorer has been keenly observing. Movie Games SA, the publisher behind the popular title Drug Dealer Simulator, has announced it is investigating another game, Schedule I, for potential copyright infringement. This news has ignited a firestorm within the gaming community, leading to a widespread review bombing campaign against Movie Games SA’s titles on Steam. Movie Games SA has clarified that while they are examining potential similarities, no formal legal action has been initiated. Their stated aim is to engage in dialogue with Schedule I’s developer, TVGS, preferring an “open approach” over immediate measures to halt Schedule I’s sales.
Gamer Backlash: The Review Bombing Campaign
The announcement of the investigation has triggered a fierce gamer backlash, manifesting primarily as a coordinated negative review campaign targeting Drug Dealer Simulator and its sequel, Drug Dealer Simulator 2. Consequently, recent reviews for the original Drug Dealer Simulator have plummeted to “overwhelmingly negative” on Steam, while Drug Dealer Simulator 2‘s recent feedback has shifted to “mostly negative.” The sentiment expressed in these reviews is potent, with many players accusing Movie Games SA of jealousy and anti-competitive tactics. Here are some examples of the user feedback:
- Imagine getting your ass handed to you by one person with passion and vision, and thinking the right move is to cry to your legal team instead.
- I enjoyed this at the time but after seeing how these jealous devs are taking legal action against an arguably superior game for the sole reason that they’re jealous
- Had high hopes for this game, was a shame that it turned out so bad and the devs decide to go after schedule 1 instead of making a good game.
- Lmao, removing this scum bag devs game out of my library, get ♥♥♥♥♥♥, seethe, cope, loathe, +ratio. maybe improve your ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ drug game instead of going after an indie dev for making a far better product than a full fledged dev company LOL.
- I liked the game up until they became greedy and jealous that a solo game developer, who created a game 10 times greater than theirs is so successful.
- Screw this company, crying over a solo game developer, creating a better game than them.
- The devs behind this trash are suing the solo developer behind Schedule I for “copyright infringement”. Clearly just jealous that he made a better game
- Boooooo. go cry because schedule 1 is a better game. jealous ♥♥♥♥♥
Interestingly, even some recent positive reviews for Drug Dealer Simulator 2 acknowledge the ongoing controversy. One user, for instance, stated they believe the game is superior to Schedule I but criticized “the lawsuit” and the ensuing negative reviews, despite no formal lawsuit currently existing.
Context: Original Reception of Drug Dealer Simulator Titles
Before this controversy surrounding Schedule I erupted, the original Drug Dealer Simulator was quite well-received. It boasted a “very positive” overall user review rating on Steam from over 19,000 reviews, underscoring its popularity and positive standing within its player base. Its sequel, Drug Dealer Simulator 2, while not reaching the same level of universal acclaim, held a “mixed” rating from approximately 5,500 reviews. This context is crucial, as it shows these were established titles with a substantial player following and generally favorable sentiment prior to the current backlash related to the Schedule I investigation.
The Phenomenon of Steam Review Bombing
Steam review bombing has emerged as a significant, if controversial, form of protest within the PC gaming community. Players often utilize this tactic to voice strong dissatisfaction with developers or publishers over a range of issues. As PC Gamer’s Morgan Park noted in 2024, this method is considered by some to be “gaming’s most powerful method of protest.” Such collective action can, at times, lead to tangible outcomes. A prominent example from 2024 is the Helldivers 2 PSN account linking debacle, where widespread negative reviews played a part in Sony reversing its contentious decision. The current situation involving Movie Games SA highlights the immediate and potent impact such campaigns can have on a game’s public perception and its publisher.
The preemptive backlash against Movie Games SA is particularly noteworthy. The company is facing substantial criticism and a damaging review campaign despite, as of this writing, not having initiated any formal legal proceedings against Schedule I. This scenario underscores a potential for misdirected anger in such community actions, where the reaction precedes definitive steps like Cease & Desist letters or lawsuits. While some might view this as a proactive deterrent to dissuade Movie Games SA from pursuing legal avenues, it also means the publisher is being penalized for an action it has not yet formally taken. The resolution of this situation remains uncertain. Should Movie Games SA decide against pursuing the matter further, it would be interesting to observe if the community revisits their reviews to reflect the updated circumstances. As TechTalesLeo, I’ll continue to follow this story for Digital Tech Explorer and provide updates as they develop.