The Dice Tower review of this game is very helpful to understanding what this game is about, and that it probably has a rather limited intended audience (of which I'm a member).

BE FOREWARNED, HOWEVER! Purchasing a "hard copy" of the cards only gets you the cards (and the box to store them in, if you wish) -- IT DOES NOT INCLUDE A HARD COPY OF THE RULES! Generally if I purchase a game, I expect the rules to the game to come with said game, in the same form (digital or hard copy) as the form I purchased, and I find it bad form that that is not the case here, and that it should be up to a customer's review to make that clear. The "Alternate Preview" link provides the full rules, so one simply needs to download that PDF and print it oneself, but I really feel that should be explicitly pointed out. Caveat emptor! Aside from this concern, I would give the game a 5 star rating -- with the understanding that this IS a game for those who enjoy formal logic, and perhaps had a little introduction to that in school through math class, computer programming, or a class explicitly in formal logic.

The deck is basically as described, and will prove fairly useful when you need to put a face to an NPC's name in your role-playing game. The photos included are all of people dressed in 20th/21st century clothing, so some imagination might be needed to use this for other periods, but not to a terrible degree.

I confess that I am somewhat disappointed by the lack of age diversity in the deck. There are a few photos of people well over 60, but not many, and the pictures of women in particular mostly seem to be of women in their 20's, maybe early 30's. There seems to be a little more age diverstiy among the photos of men.

I suspect that I will use this deck in my own games to put faces to what might otherwise have been nameless, faceless NPCs, but for major characters, I'm more likely to search for other images on-line or through cutting pictures from old magazines or the like.

It's clear from reading the rules that the authors enjoy playing by them, but I found it very difficult to get any sense of how the game is actually to be played. In several places in the rules, I got the impression that the rules are more intended for player-vs.-player conflicts than for a team of players working together to engage in espionage against a common foe. There is a LOT of focus on developing the internal structure of the intelligence agency for which the agents work, but almost none on developing antagonists or scenarios.

The production values are good (not great, but good), but as I find to be all too often the case with self-published materials, more effort is needed in proofreading and editing, as there are too many instances of misspelled words, missing words, and even subject/verb disagreement (singuler/plural). No doubt in an effort to give the rules a spy-novel "feel", the rules are also jargon-heavy, but to a degree that makes the rules too opaque: e.g., the term "CON OPs" is used frequently, and I'm STILL trying to find a non-abbreviated use or definition for it.

I'm certainly not going to use these rules for my own espionage games, and I fear there's very little I'm likely to mine from them in terms of ideas to adopt and adapt to include in my games, either.