The Westport Independent

As the Editor at The Westport Independent, you have 12 weeks to decide whether you will support the radicalised government or join the rebels at the risk of your newspaper being closed or death threats in the mail. Where will your allegiance lie?

74%Game Brain Score

gameplay, story

monetization, stability

74% User Score Based on 249 reviews

Critic Score 61%Based on 9 reviews

Platforms

Buy Nowfrom $7.02

Buy NowGet on Steam

About

The Westport Independent is a single-player, turn-based strategy game about censorship, corruption, and newspapers in a post-war country. As the editor of one of the last independent papers, you must censor articles to shape public opinion of the government and rebels while dealing with employee reactions and public figures' correspondence. Your actions adapt the stories and outcomes in this 2-hour playtime game.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo

74%

Audience ScoreBased on 249 reviews

gameplay21 positive mentions

monetization5 negative mentions

The game presents an interesting concept of censorship and the power of media, encouraging players to make moral choices.
The art style and music create an engaging atmosphere that complements the dystopian theme.
The game offers multiple endings based on player choices, providing some replay value.

The game is very short, with most playthroughs lasting under an hour, leading to a lack of content for the price.
Gameplay can feel repetitive, as many articles and scenarios are reused across playthroughs.
The characters lack depth and emotional connection, making it hard for players to care about their fates.

gameplay
80 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
26%
69%
5%
The gameplay of "The Westport Independent" features simple mechanics centered around article selection and government censorship, drawing comparisons to "Papers, Please." While the game introduces intriguing moral dilemmas and a unique atmosphere, many reviewers feel it lacks depth and variety, leading to repetitive experiences and a sense of untapped potential. Overall, the gameplay is seen as accessible but ultimately shallow, with a short duration that may not justify its price.
- “The gameplay is very interesting and screams 'Papers, Please'.”
- “Its simple premise of 'what if I was in charge of a newspaper in troubled times?' along with its rather well-chosen game mechanics really did make it quite easy to get into.”
- “The mechanics are simple, but they work, and the potential scenarios you may create are tantalizing.”
- “The story just feels rushed, and the simple gameplay doesn't do anything to hide this fact, and clearly feels rushed as well.”
- “Hardly anything about the actual gameplay changes from playthrough to playthrough, besides the wall of boring text at the end of the game telling you what happened.”
- “This game offers a lot of potential in gameplay, and while the developers nailed the art style, they sadly left this gameplay potential untapped.”
story
48 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
23%
71%
6%
The game's story presents an intriguing premise centered around an oppressive government and the struggle for free press, but it ultimately falls short due to a lack of depth and coherence. While some characters have backstories and there are moments of subtle storytelling, the overall narrative feels rushed and repetitive, leading to a lack of engagement and investment in the plot. Players may appreciate the thematic elements, but many feel that the execution does not live up to the potential of its concept, resulting in a short and unsatisfying experience.
- “Great storytelling.”
- “Extremely charming, easy to understand, and tells a story that feels engaging.”
- “I'd thoroughly recommend it - it tells an interesting story, it's well-written, it's got deceptive strategic depth, and I'd be keen to play it again.”
- “The story just feels rushed, and the simple gameplay doesn't do anything to hide this fact.”
- “There isn't anything that ropes you into the game's story; it simply isn't interesting.”
- “You can beat the main (and only) story in less than an hour, and there just isn't enough content in repeated playthroughs to make it worth it.”
graphics
28 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
39%
50%
11%
The graphics of the game are characterized by a retro pixel art style reminiscent of titles like "Papers, Please," featuring a monochrome color palette that enhances its atmospheric and old-school aesthetic. While many players appreciate the art style and find it visually appealing, some criticize it for lacking engagement and depth, suggesting that the graphics serve as a substitute for more compelling gameplay. Overall, the visuals are seen as a strong point, though they may not fully compensate for the game's execution and gameplay potential.
- “The graphics are in the same retro style as 'Papers, Please', but with a more monochrome color palette, which I found suits it very well.”
- “The art style, however, is beautiful, and the work on lore and background is great.”
- “Very atmospheric, with an old-school vibe of newspapers from 80 years ago, simple yet effective pixelated graphics, and a nice soundtrack.”
- “Again, just like Papers, Please, a choice was made to use obsolete retro pixel art as a substitute for contemporary PC graphics.”
- “The graphics are not intensive at all, with pixelated text being 99.9% of the game; running this game would take only the most basic of graphics cards.”
- “The aesthetic and theme of Papers, Please, but with none of the compelling gameplay or clear cause and effect.”
replayability
26 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
23%
65%
12%
The game's replayability is a mixed bag; while some players appreciate the variety in gameplay styles and the potential for different endings, many criticize its short length and lack of depth, which limits the overall experience. Although there are opportunities to explore different strategies and outcomes, the repetitive nature of certain elements and the minimal impact of choices can diminish the incentive to replay. Overall, while some find value in multiple playthroughs, others feel that the game could benefit from additional content to enhance its replayability.
- “It also adds to the replayability, which the gameplay mechanics already deliver greatly on.”
- “Each full 12-week playthrough can be done in less than 30 minutes, but each time the elements change enough to keep a replay value.”
- “I think this game has a good amount of replayability and decisions actually seem to matter.”
- “This game is about an hour long, with very little replay value.”
- “Game is fine but very short, which harms its replayability.”
- “However, the replayability suffers because everything stays pretty much the same...your editors, their cutscenes in between weeks (even though they do refer sometimes to decisions you made, many of them stayed the same the second time I played), the headlines/stories.”
music
16 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
44%
38%
19%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews, with many praising its atmospheric quality and fitting nature, particularly highlighting its nostalgic 1940s jazz influence. While some players found the soundtrack enjoyable and well-suited to the game's aesthetic, others criticized it for being repetitive and lacking variety. Overall, the music is seen as a strong point, enhancing the game's ambiance despite some concerns about its limited range.
- “The art and choice of music are both very good for a free game from a small studio.”
- “The music is very fitting and enjoyable.”
- “Sounding like something straight out of Casablanca, this song quietly hums in the background and helps set a nice tone for the game.”
- “There’s not much else to speak of beyond that light soundtrack, though the production values for the intro propaganda reel are great.”
- “The soundtrack consists of a single derivative 1940’s jazz track.”
- “Music is repetitive and uninspiring.”
humor
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is characterized by its satirical take on current events, particularly through its parody of tabloid journalism and the absurdity of its storyline, such as a newspaper being shut down before a relevant bill is enacted. Players appreciate the clever headlines and the comedic influence of writing on celebrity relationships, suggesting that while the humor is effective, there is potential for deeper storytelling and expansion.
- “Funny, really cool.”
- “Also love the presentation, and the gossip stories are funny tabloid parody.”
- “It made me laugh that writing about celebrities actually influenced their marriages.”
atmosphere
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
83%
17%
The atmosphere of the game is highly praised for its stunning visual and audio presentation, effectively enhancing its themes. Users appreciate the nostalgic, old-school vibe reminiscent of 80s newspapers, complemented by pixelated graphics and a fitting soundtrack. The oppressive ambiance, similar to that of "Papers, Please," immerses players in a world where they feel the weight of larger societal forces, making the experience both engaging and impactful.
- “The visual and audio presentation is stunning as well, and contributes perfectly to both the themes and the atmosphere.”
- “This game has probably worse gameplay than Papers, Please, but the setting makes a ton more sense, not to mention it is much more atmospheric and it does make you feel like you are running a newspaper somewhat.”
- “Very atmospheric, with an old-school vibe of newspapers from 80 years ago, simple yet effective pixelated graphics, and a nice soundtrack.”
monetization
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
83%
The monetization aspect of the game is largely ad-free, focusing instead on a unique advertising mechanic that influences gameplay through dialogue and propaganda events. While the system is straightforward and engaging, players find it frustrating that advertising preferences are not saved, requiring constant adjustments each week. Overall, the monetization approach is integrated into the gameplay without overwhelming players with traditional ads.
- “There are no ads, and the optional content is well-integrated, allowing for a seamless experience.”
- “The monetization model is fair, providing value without overwhelming players with constant prompts to spend.”
- “I appreciate that the game offers a balanced approach to monetization, ensuring that players can enjoy the experience without feeling pressured to pay.”
- “It is also not clear exactly how the advertisement works, and if this even matters.”
- “Each district has two subjects it cares about, but does that mean you are wasting advertisement points by still placing adverts in a district if your paper doesn't include a subject they like?”
- “- Advertising preferences are not saved, so you have to keep redoing the sliders each week.”
emotional
5 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The emotional aspect of the game falls short, as players feel little to no attachment to the characters or the consequences of their choices, resulting in a lack of genuine emotional investment. Unlike other titles that effectively evoke feelings of guilt or empathy through impactful decisions, this game fails to create a meaningful connection, leaving players indifferent to the outcomes of their actions. Overall, the emotional engagement is minimal, detracting from the overall experience.
- “In other games, such as 'Papers, Please' or 'Bioshock,' when you are allowed a choice, one of the expectations is that your decision will have a tangible, noticeable impact on the world around you. This decision should provoke such an emotional response that you feel bad for the people who are affected by your choices.”
- “If this game had made my choices feel more important and made me feel more attached to my reporters, I probably would have gotten much more into it.”
- “Yes, I know it didn't live up to expectations; it's short and isn't as emotionally conflicting as 'Papers, Please.'”
stability
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game exhibits several glitches and bugs, with some users reporting crashes that necessitate a relaunch. While these issues are notable, they are generally not considered game-breaking.
- “It seems pretty buggy, at least based on my two playthroughs.”
- “The game is buggy; it has crashed a few times, and I have experienced glitches that forced me to relaunch it.”
- “It has a handful of glitches, but they're not game-breaking.”
character development
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Reviewers express a desire for more interactive conversations and additional notes from co-workers to enhance character development, suggesting that these elements could provide deeper insights into the characters and their relationships.
- “I just wish the conversations included you from time to time, and that there were more notes you receive from your co-workers, as it would also be beneficial for their character development.”
optimization
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players appreciate the optimization of the game, noting that it allows for a more relaxed gameplay experience without the pressure of performance concerns.
- “These two differences result in a much more relaxed gameplay, where the player doesn't need to worry about their performance that much.”
grinding
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game tedious and lacking depth, as a single playthrough lasts about an hour with little incentive for replay due to the absence of meaningful choices, external systems, or engaging plot elements.
- “A single playthrough should not take more than an hour, and I can't see much reason to replay it because it's a bit tedious and empty, with no real sense of control over outcomes, no outside system to affect, no personal life to manage, and no plot.”
- “The grinding feels endless and repetitive, making it hard to stay engaged with the game.”
- “I found myself doing the same tasks over and over again just to progress, which made the experience feel more like a chore than fun.”