Security 51 Review Summary

Excellent pixel art and atmosphere make it a worthy successor to Papers Please, though the low challenge, weak story, and overpriced upgrades hold it back.

Excellent pixel art and atmosphere: The pixel art style is widely praised for creating an incredible atmosphere, being visually appealing, and suiting the game's theme, with high-quality graphics and animations.

Smooth difficulty and gradual mechanics: Players appreciate the gradual introduction of new mechanics and challenges, which keeps the game interesting without overwhelming, ensuring fair difficulty and smooth progression.

Worthy successor to Papers, Please: Many players compare the game favorably to Papers, Please, describing it as a worthy successor that evolves the formula with more systems, identity, and content while retaining the core appeal.

Highly addictive and fun gameplay: Players consistently find the game addictive, engrossing, and enjoyable, with engaging mechanics that make them want to keep playing.

Well-executed and polished game: Players note the game runs well, is well made, and shows high quality in design, details, and developer effort, contributing to an overall excellent experience.

Difficulty is too low: Compared to Papers, Please, the game is significantly easier, with little challenge or tension, making it feel dumbed down for a wider audience. Errors are rare, resources are abundant, and there is no real danger of failing.

Weak story and narrative engagement: The game lacks a compelling story, with fragmented dialogues, faceless NPCs, and little emotional connection. The narrative is disconnected from the main checking gameplay, reducing immersion and interest.

Upgrades are expensive and useless: Shop items and upgrades are priced too high relative to income, and their effects are negligible or unclear, making them nearly pointless. Players struggle to afford them even with near-perfect performance.

Bugs and technical issues: There are multiple bugs, including progression-blocking issues, false warnings, and platform-specific font problems, which hinder the experience. These technical defects can force restarts or make the game unplayable.

Anomaly detection is flawed: Players are penalized for missing anomalies that are not visible or not clear, and some anomalies appear only once or have inconsistent translations. The detection process is unintuitive and leads to unfair fines.

Papers Please-like inspection gameplay: Multiple reviews compare the game to Papers, Please, highlighting the document-checking, inspection, and checkpoint mechanics as the core loop. The game also adds sci-fi and supernatural anomaly elements beyond the original.

Varied inspection mechanics available: Players use various inspection tools, including cameras for anomalies, X-ray, blood analysis, and document scanning. This adds depth and variety to the checkpoint gameplay.

Daily rule changes and difficulty: Rules change each day, and new challenges are gradually introduced, requiring players to keep track of many systems. Difficulty increases by layering new mechanics on familiar ones.

Document and identity verification: Core gameplay involves checking names, ID numbers, photos, and medical records against daily rules. Players must spot mismatches and decide to pass, call security, or deny entry.

Anomaly detection and containment: Players detect and handle anomalies, such as disguised humans or body anomalies, using tools like cameras and X-rays. They can choose to contain, kill, or isolate anomalies.

Performance is generally smooth: Players report the game runs well overall, with one user noting it runs perfectly on Steam Deck. This indicates broad technical stability across platforms.

Progression-blocking bugs exist: At least one player encountered bugs that prevent progress in the game. These are critical issues that can halt gameplay and frustrate users.

Resolution scaling reduces clarity: Resolution scaling blurs the game and makes fonts unreadable, degrading the visual experience. This is a common complaint that impacts readability and overall polish.

Ultrawide support is limited: The game has limited compatibility with ultrawide resolutions, which may cause visual or UI issues for players using such displays. This restricts the experience for a niche but growing segment.

Recommended for Papers Please fans: Many reviewers recommend the game specifically to fans of Papers, Please and similar document-checking games like Quarantine Zone. They find it addictive and engaging, appealing to those who enjoy attention to detail and investigation.

Overall positive recommendation: A number of reviewers explicitly endorse the game, with some saying it is absolutely worth buying. They highlight its enjoyable gameplay loop and value for the price.

Not a Papers Please substitute: Some reviewers advise against buying the game as a replacement for Papers, Please, recommending other games instead. They feel it is better as a 2D substitute for Quarantine Zone: Last Stop.

Humor and memes polarize: One reviewer notes that the game's excessive humor, references, and memes may not suit everyone. Another recommends it for players seeking a relaxing observation game with humor, indicating mixed reactions to the tone.

Cheap and worth price: Reviewers mention that the game is cheap even without a discount. Some recommend purchasing it if the price drops, indicating good value for money.

Story completion: 4.0h.

The game is widely criticized for tedious, repetitive early-game mechanics, an unskippable tutorial, and unfair difficulty, leading to a lack of enjoyment for many players. While a few reviewers note the game's challenge and daily variety, no evidence indicates that the game becomes fun after any point.

Friction: unskippable tutorial; repetitive early-game dialog; tedious packaging mechanics; unfair difficulty detection; slow interface.

Papers Please Enthusiast: Attentive, enjoys thematic atmosphere and relaxed pacing while tracking multiple systems. Motivation: Enjoying the familiar Papers Please-style gameplay loop with added complexity and a chill vibe. Stance: buy.

Quality of Life Pragmatist: Methodical, appreciates trial and error but notices missing polish and evaluates value for money. Motivation: Intrigued by the core loop but seeks a more polished experience before unconditionally recommending. Stance: sale.

Papers Please Purist: Comparative and critical, judges the game against the original Papers Please and similar clones. Motivation: Seeking a high-quality experience matching or exceeding Papers Please, and disappointed by this title. Stance: no buy.

Frequent Papers Please comparisons: Many reviews compare the game to Papers, Please, with mixed opinions on whether it improves upon or poorly imitates the original. Some see it as a worthy successor, while others criticize it for lacking depth.

Similar titles comparisons: The game is also compared to Beholder, Contraband Police, Quarantine Zone, and other similar titles, with some reviewers finding it on par and others noting differences.

Developer and publisher noted: Reviews mention that the developers are the same as Beholder and that the game is published by Alawar, which may influence expectations.

Described as Papers Please plus X-Files: One review describes the game as 'Papers, Please + X-Files', and another notes it is set in a secret Area 51 facility, combining bureaucratic gameplay with sci-fi elements.

Positive developer feedback response: Some reviews highlight that developers listened to community feedback during development, leading to changes in instructions, difficulty, and technical issues.