Name: Screenwise
Author: Screenwise

Where to Play

Screenwise Verdict

Papers, Please is a masterpiece, but let's be clear: this is not a game for kids, and it's barely even "fun" in the traditional sense. It's more like interactive political theater that happens to use game mechanics brilliantly.

Lucas Pope created something genuinely special here—a game that makes you feel the grinding moral compromise of authoritarian bureaucracy by having you live it. The genius is that stamping documents becomes genuinely stressful when your family is starving and you're deciding whether to separate a couple at the border.

The mature content (nudity, suicide, violence) isn't there for shock value; it's part of the oppressive reality the game depicts. But it's still genuinely disturbing, and the emotional weight is real. Players report feeling complicit, exhausted, guilty—exactly as intended.

For older teens (17+) interested in ethics, politics, or serious storytelling, this is essential. For adults who want games that challenge rather than comfort, it's brilliant. For everyone else, including younger teens who might handle the content descriptors, the emotional toll might be too much. This isn't Fortnite with some blood—it's a meditation on how systems break people.

Age Fit

This is squarely for ages 17+ and thoughtful adults. The mature content is integral to the message, not gratuitous, but it's still genuinely heavy stuff. College students studying ethics or political science would get enormous value from it. Not appropriate for younger teens despite the simple graphics.

WISE Breakdown

Wholesome

42

This is a deliberately bleak, morally exhausting experience set in a dystopian communist state. You're forced to make impossible choices between feeding your family and doing the right thing—turning away refugees, separating families, accepting bribes. The game depicts suicide, violence, and the grinding dehumanization of bureaucracy. It's intentionally unwholesome to make a point, which is effective but emotionally draining.

Imaginative

88

Wildly original concept—making paperwork compelling gameplay is a genuine creative achievement. Lucas Pope turned document inspection into a tense puzzle-strategy hybrid that's been widely imitated but never matched. The fictional communist state of Arstotzka feels fully realized despite minimal storytelling. It invites you to think creatively about moral choices and systemic pressures in ways few games attempt.

Safe

35

ESRB rates it M 17+ for blood, nudity, sexual themes, strong language, violence, and drug references. IMDb parent guide mentions disturbing images including suicide, and violent content throughout. The game includes full-frontal nudity during body scans, depictions of terrorist attacks, and references to sex trafficking. No predatory monetization or online chat, but the content itself is decidedly mature and could be genuinely upsetting.

Enriching

91

This is one of the most effective empathy-building games ever made. It viscerally demonstrates how ordinary people become complicit in authoritarian systems, how poverty constrains moral choice, and how bureaucracy dehumanizes. Players report genuine emotional impact and lasting insights about immigration, ethics under pressure, and systemic injustice. It's educational without being preachy, teaching through experience rather than lecture.

Parent Info

✓

Why It Might Be Great

Genuinely original gameplay that makes document-checking compelling and tense
One of the most effective empathy-building experiences in gaming—you feel the weight of impossible choices
Teaches about authoritarianism, immigration, and systemic injustice through lived experience rather than lectures
Critically acclaimed indie masterpiece that proves games can tackle serious themes with sophistication
No manipulative monetization, ads, or online toxicity—a pure single-player artistic statement

⚠

What to Watch For

Rated M 17+ for good reason: includes full-frontal nudity, suicide, violence, and sex trafficking references
Emotionally exhausting by design—this isn't fun escapism, it's meant to make you uncomfortable
The moral choices can be genuinely distressing; some players report feeling complicit and guilty
Extremely difficult gameplay that mirrors the impossible pressures of the scenario

Conversation Starters

"When you had to choose between letting someone in who might be lying versus keeping your job, what did you decide? How did that feel?"
"The game shows how normal people can become part of oppressive systems. Do you think that could happen to you? What would you do differently?"
"How did the game change how you think about immigration officers or bureaucracy in real life?"
"Were there moments where you felt like you had no good options? How do you make ethical choices when every option has a cost?"

Ask Anything

Get a personalized guide on any topic