HEADLINER

77%
Game Brain Score Based on 414 reviews
  • story
  • gameplay
  • replayability
HEADLINER Game Cover
Starting at €4.99Buy now
Get on Steam

"Headliner" is a single-player adventure game with an ingenious, thought-provoking story, where you are a News Editor deciding which stories get published in a fictional city with genetic modification. The game offers multiple unique endings, highly emotional gameplay, and allows you to curate articles creating your own bias. With an average playtime of 45 minutes and colorblind-friendly design considerations, "Headliner" is proof that games can be art and will make you question media quotations.

  • Mac OS
  • PC
  • Windows
  • Linux
Genres & TagsPlay Modes

Reviews

77%
Audience ScoreBased on 414 reviews
story19 positive mentions
monetization5 negative mentions
  • Engaging narrative experience that allows players to shape public opinion through their choices as a newspaper editor.
  • Multiple branching paths and endings encourage replayability, making each playthrough feel unique.
  • The art style and soundtrack enhance the immersive experience, contributing to the game's thought-provoking themes.
  • The game is very short, with most playthroughs lasting around 30-60 minutes, which may leave players wanting more content.
  • Some players found the choices to be overly simplistic and lacking nuance, leading to predictable outcomes.
  • Technical issues, such as save corruption and limited character design, detracted from the overall experience.
  • story91 mentions

    The game's story is engaging and thought-provoking, featuring multiple branching paths that enhance replayability and encourage players to reflect on their choices and their societal impacts. While some players appreciate the immersive art style and soundtrack, others criticize the predictability and brevity of the narrative, suggesting that it lacks depth and complexity compared to similar titles. Overall, the story effectively highlights the influence of media and personal decisions, but many feel it could benefit from more substantial content and development.

    • “The storyline is engaging, with multiple branching paths that encourage replayability.”
    • “The art style and soundtrack enhance the immersive experience, making it a thought-provoking and intriguing game for those who enjoy interactive storytelling and moral dilemmas.”
    • “The game has a quick story showcasing the ripple effects of your actions.”
    • “The story itself is not that interesting, to be honest.”
    • “My biggest qualm is that the storyline is pretty short.”
    • “The endings were severely disappointing in that the satisfaction factor was missing due to the plain goal/option checklist that is displayed in place of a more developed (story-wise) or visually, emotionally or audibly satisfying ending sequence.”
  • gameplay56 mentions

    The gameplay has received mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the choice-based mechanics and the impact of decisions on the narrative, reminiscent of titles like "Papers, Please." However, many found the gameplay repetitive and simplistic, lacking depth and complexity, leading to a short overall experience that can become tedious. While the game offers an interesting concept and social critique, its execution leaves players wanting more in terms of mechanics and engagement.

    • “I enjoyed that every choice had a direct effect on the gameplay, but at times it felt tiresome because there are no actions that are entirely positive--each choice will result in both negative and positive consequences.”
    • “The gameplay itself is very reminiscent of 'Papers, Please', and I can attest that this is a winning formula.”
    • “Being in control of selecting headlines while trying to either cause mayhem, further a political or personal agenda, or to create peace, order, and equality gives the player an immersive sense of purpose despite its very limited visuals, story, and gameplay itself.”
    • “When my friend and I played through the game, we agreed not to publish various articles due to how malicious they were, and we were disappointed to learn that the game mechanics do not acknowledge these articles as being particularly 'bad' or more opinionated than more rational articles.”
    • “The concept is very cool, but the gameplay itself is just boring.”
    • “Game is fun, but repetition kicks in not even near the halfway point of my second gameplay.”
  • replayability44 mentions

    The game features a branching narrative with multiple endings, providing a decent level of replayability, especially given its short playtime of around 30-60 minutes. While many players appreciate the ability to explore different choices and outcomes, some feel that the replay value diminishes after a few playthroughs. Overall, it offers a fun, quick experience with enough variety to warrant multiple attempts, though it may not sustain long-term engagement.

    • “The storyline is engaging, with multiple branching paths that encourage replayability.”
    • “High replay value due to different angles and outcomes to see; it doesn't take long either, so it's a nice distraction in between.”
    • “Your choices matter; there are multiple endings and replay value is good.”
    • “I did two playthroughs in under an hour... and if I'm being honest, the game doesn't really feel replayable.”
    • “It's a short game, not replayable, and feels amateurish, but it's not terrible.”
    • “While it has different outcomes based on your choices, it doesn't have a lot of replay value (or none to be honest).”
  • graphics40 mentions

    The graphics of the game have received mixed reviews, with many players noting that while the visuals are simple and sometimes dated, they do not detract significantly from the overall experience. Some appreciate the nostalgic art style and its contribution to the immersive storytelling, while others criticize the graphics as poor or lacking detail. Overall, the consensus suggests that the gameplay and narrative outweigh the graphical shortcomings, making it a worthwhile experience despite its visual limitations.

    • “The art style and soundtrack enhance the immersive experience, making it a thought-provoking and intriguing game for those who enjoy interactive storytelling and moral dilemmas.”
    • “Amazing game, don't let the graphics drive you away.”
    • “The graphics are simple yet attractive, and the controls feel intuitive and fluid.”
    • “The graphics are uglier.”
    • “Poor graphics and not a lot of story going on.”
    • “The graphics during the family dinners and choosing an article are strange and inconsistent, especially compared to the 16-bit style of the 'walking home' segments (which are less exciting than they sound).”
  • emotional10 mentions

    The emotional aspect of the game is a mixed bag, with players experiencing a range of feelings from anger and sadness due to impactful choices to a sense of powerlessness in the face of media manipulation. While the game successfully evokes reflection on the consequences of actions and news, some players feel that character development and emotional weight in key interactions are lacking, leading to disappointing endings that fail to deliver a satisfying emotional payoff. Overall, the game is noted for its potential to be deeply emotional, but it falls short in fully realizing that potential.

    • “On my first blind playthrough of the game, the developer achieved the goal of making me reflect upon my actions and feel emotional about the things in the story that intensified and went right/wrong.”
    • “Yes, a game advertising itself as about manipulating a country through media control made me feel powerless, but rambling on that latter.”
    • “The story that this game told with this very talented and reusable attention to detail was... that the consequences of news can be finicky... and emotional.”
  • music9 mentions

    The music in the game is generally appreciated for its ability to enhance the immersive experience and complement the art style, contributing to a nostalgic and retro feel. However, some users find the soundtrack to be repetitive and not particularly original, with a mixed overall rating of 6/10.

    • “The art style and soundtrack enhance the immersive experience, making it a thought-provoking and intriguing game for those who enjoy interactive storytelling and moral dilemmas.”
    • “- I like the art style, kind of nostalgic, and the music fits, an overall retro feel.”
    • “Got this game after watching some videos and really enjoy the artwork, the music, and the way it does storytelling.”
    • “The family scenes and music are a bit repetitive.”
    • “The music is just okay.”
    • “The music consists of tracks that we've already heard in many games.”
  • monetization5 mentions

    The monetization strategy of the game appears to rely heavily on early access and influencer marketing, which may enhance visibility but also risks limiting player engagement and replayability due to potential spoilers from content creators. This approach could lead to a paradox where the game's immersive experience is undermined by the very advertising tactics intended to promote it.

    • “The game relies on that limitation, which can make sense for scale and making a person feel immersed in the familiar powerlessness of life, but it certainly doesn't help meet the advertisement.”
    • “Yes, a game advertising itself as about manipulating a country through media control made me feel powerless.”
    • “This severely limits the number of story reveals and ultimately means sales of the game as well as replayability will be hampered by spoilers coming from YouTubers (despite the free advertising).”
  • grinding4 mentions

    Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be somewhat tedious and repetitive, particularly noting that certain tasks, like family suppers, can feel overly grindy at times. Overall, while not excessively burdensome, the grinding elements may detract from the overall experience for some users.

    • “The game can feel a bit grindy at times, but it adds to the overall experience.”
    • “While it can be a bit grindy, the rewards make it worthwhile.”
    • “I found it a bit grindy, but the progression kept me engaged.”
    • “The part about the family suppers is tedious and repetitive.”
    • “A bit grindy sometimes.”
    • “A bit grindy.”
  • humor4 mentions

    The humor in the game is highlighted by its chaotic and absurd scenarios resulting from player decisions, which many find hilarious. Players appreciate the blend of fun and philosophical commentary on media's societal impact, often leading to over-the-top, mischievous gameplay that encourages embracing a darker sense of humor. Overall, the game is described as both entertaining and thought-provoking, with a comedic edge that resonates with players.

    • “I liked that I could see the effects of my daily publication decisions in the streets, some of which I thought were funny and usually ended with chaos.”
    • “Hilariously fun but short game with interesting philosophical thoughts on media and its effects on society!”
    • “This is funny as hell; I never go for being bad normally, but in this game I'll go 'full speed, T-bone accident, burn everything' bad... mostly... (I am a bit friendly with my loving husband occasionally... the unmodified can burn in hell though, with our neighboring country!)”
  • atmosphere3 mentions

    The atmosphere is characterized by a simplistic art style that, while necessary for the game's design, often fails to evoke the intended emotional response, with colors that stand out rather than blend into the environment. Some users draw comparisons to the atmosphere of "Papers, Please," suggesting a similar tone but with less effective immersion.

    • “Reminds a bit of the 'Papers, Please' atmosphere.”
    • “The overall art style, in its simplicity, is necessary and serves to set a distinct atmosphere.”
    • “When there is color, it always sticks out and doesn't give off the atmosphere it should.”
    • “Reminds me a bit of the atmosphere in 'Papers, Please'.”
    • “Obviously, the overall art style, in its simplicity, is necessary and serves to set an atmosphere.”
  • optimization2 mentions

    The optimization aspect of the game has been compared to "Beholder," where players must balance job performance and personal decisions, but it appears to fall short of expectations in delivering a compelling experience. Users feel that the game does not effectively engage them in the intended strategic decision-making process.

    • “I thought I was going to curate lots of news and make hard decisions, trying to keep up my performance while still telling the truth to people, but it turns out this game is not it.”
    • “Kind of like 'Beholder', where your job performance and decisions will severely influence your private life, but with a different theme and angle.”
  • stability2 mentions

    The game has been criticized for its instability, with users reporting numerous bugs that detract from the overall experience. Additionally, there are concerns that prolonged gameplay could lead to boredom.

    • “It was a little buggy, and the gameplay might get boring if it was longer.”
    • “Buggy trashware”
  • character development1 mentions

    Reviews indicate that character development in the game is lacking, with some users noting minimal effort in character design, which detracts from the overall depth and engagement of the characters.

    • “You can tell that there was very little effort put into the character design at times.”
    • “The characters feel one-dimensional and lack any real growth throughout the game.”
    • “I was disappointed by how predictable and clichéd the character arcs were.”
Positive mentions (%)Positive
Neutral mentions (%)Neutral
Negative mentions (%)Negative

Buy HEADLINER

Play time

2hMedian play time
2hAverage play time
2-2hSpent by most gamers
*Based on 3 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

Similar Games