Movie Games SA, the company behind the popular Drug Dealer Simulator series, including the upcoming DDS 2, is currently navigating a surge of negative user reviews on Steam. This backlash stems from the publisher’s recent announcement concerning an investigation into the independent game Schedule I, developed by TVGS. On the Drug Dealer Simulator 2 Steam page, the company addressed the mounting speculation, explicitly stating that no legal action has been initiated.
Investigation Underway, Legal Case Denied
The controversy ignited when Movie Games SA publicly disclosed that an investigation was in progress due to “potential infringement” on the intellectual property associated with Drug Dealer Simulator. The specific elements under scrutiny encompass the game’s mechanics, user interface design, and narrative components. The publisher emphasized that this review process is a corporate measure, aligning with its responsibilities as a publicly listed entity, and not the commencement of a lawsuit.
TVGS, the development team behind Schedule I, has also confirmed that no legal proceedings have been launched. Despite this clarification, confusion among players led to a widespread belief that a lawsuit was imminent, triggering a flood of negative reviews targeting both Drug Dealer Simulator titles. The original game’s rating, once “very positive,” has since shifted to “mostly positive.”
Reaffirming Transparency and Corporate Duties
In an effort to mitigate the ongoing situation, Movie Games SA released an updated statement reiterating its stance. The message once again underscored that no lawsuit is in progress and clarified that the company has no intention of hindering TVGS’s ability to sell or further develop their game.
The company explained that observed similarities between the two titles prompted an initial legal assessment, which suggested that a more thorough examination was necessary. According to their statement, neglecting to pursue this inquiry could result in significant repercussions for Movie Games SA under the obligations of corporate governance.
Public Disclosure via Regulatory Channels
The initial announcement regarding the investigation was released through Poland’s ESPI system—a designated platform for mandatory communications by publicly traded companies. Movie Games SA indicated that this disclosure was intended solely for transparency purposes. However, following media coverage, the information was reportedly misinterpreted in some instances as confirmation of an impending lawsuit.
While the company did not directly appeal to players to cease posting negative reviews, the tone of their update strongly implied a request for the community to reconsider their actions.
Community Reactions Remain Divided
Despite the publisher’s attempts to clarify the situation, a significant portion of community feedback remains critical. Some responses acknowledge that Movie Games SA’s actions might align with standard corporate procedures, particularly for a publicly listed company. Nevertheless, skepticism persists, fueled in part by the timing of the investigation coinciding with the increasing popularity of Schedule I, which has rapidly climbed Steam’s most-played charts.
Ongoing speculation suggests that the publisher’s investigation might be driven less by regulatory obligations and more by a desire to capitalize on the indie game’s growing success. For the time being, Movie Games SA continues to assert that no lawsuit has been filed. Whether this assurance will be sufficient to quell the ongoing backlash remains to be seen.