Scan barcode
factolvictor's review against another edition
3.0
To much action, you don't know what's really happening. Well, that was my first impression. I'll keep reading the series to see if it gets better.
rbz39's review against another edition
dark
emotional
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
ghostlydreamer's review against another edition
dark
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
Hmm. The story wasn't bad, by any means. Some cliche moments, to be sure. But not bad. I think it was just too confusing because the layout of the panels maybe could have been done better. The art was solid, though it's not my favorite art style. I don't necessarily want the story to be longer, but there were some gaps that would've been nice to see filled in. Overall, I'll give it 2.5 stars.
cuteasamuntin's review against another edition
dark
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
ptencha's review against another edition
dark
tense
fast-paced
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
3.0
nh64's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
jl_shioshita's review against another edition
adventurous
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
jobatabs's review against another edition
challenging
dark
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
frasersimons's review against another edition
2.0
This revolves around a woman named Nadia who works for Trauma Team. It’s framed as her giving a psychiatric debrief in order to be cleared for duty after a exfiltration goes awry. It shifts from the interview into flashbacks as Nadia embarks on a new assignment that similarly goes bad.
Initially, this is compelling. I didn’t mind the art, I liked trying to humanize trauma team because they’re a corporation that forces lack of agency onto individuals by dictating who gets necessary care. Of course, only those who can afford it get it. But it also, seemingly, doesn’t care if those with memberships kill members of the trauma team. And that’s when this story starts to fall apart.
Diegetically, the story actually doesn’t make sense according to the world as established in the video games, which I have played and beaten. And within that world, I’ve never seen gangs attack trauma team and when they do, they are literally just mowed down because trauma team has access to corporate tech that is far and away better than what the gangs have. Now, granted, in higher levels, I think a player character could take on trauma team, if they approached it smartly. But also, they could obliterate an entire gang very easily. Also meds in game don’t look like they do in the comic, and combat stimulants are more effective.
Within the world of the comic, divorced from the game, the story fails to follow through on what is interesting about the comic. It tries to show how autonomy is removed when serving a corporate entity. And the only outcome for those who choose to dissent end in death; but that this choice is poetic or noble because a traditional sense of Justice is being served. It’s actually just revenge though, in my opinion, given what we learn of the target to be exfiltrated when Nadia returns to duty.
It constantly seems at odds, adding worldbuilding that is not present in the game; sometimes actually contradictory. It seems hard to believe that a person who pays for their plan and then is known to harm the trauma team would be something the corporation would disregard. If anything, it would heavily police those that pay and qualify with treatment, cancelling service. Why would they sacrifice equipment and Human Resources if they don’t have to? They’d just keep the money and jettison the person, free of liability, no?
So who is this story for?
Why is it attached to the game world? Perhaps if it wasn’t connected directly to the game, some of it would have worked? Nadia’s story, ultimately, lacks follow through, though. So I’m not sure how much would have resonated with me regardless. Just being another story where there’s no ostensibly viable option and so death is preferable is trite in cyberpunk. We should be attempting to explore much more interesting questions.
Initially, this is compelling. I didn’t mind the art, I liked trying to humanize trauma team because they’re a corporation that forces lack of agency onto individuals by dictating who gets necessary care. Of course, only those who can afford it get it. But it also, seemingly, doesn’t care if those with memberships kill members of the trauma team. And that’s when this story starts to fall apart.
Diegetically, the story actually doesn’t make sense according to the world as established in the video games, which I have played and beaten. And within that world, I’ve never seen gangs attack trauma team and when they do, they are literally just mowed down because trauma team has access to corporate tech that is far and away better than what the gangs have. Now, granted, in higher levels, I think a player character could take on trauma team, if they approached it smartly. But also, they could obliterate an entire gang very easily. Also meds in game don’t look like they do in the comic, and combat stimulants are more effective.
Within the world of the comic, divorced from the game, the story fails to follow through on what is interesting about the comic. It tries to show how autonomy is removed when serving a corporate entity. And the only outcome for those who choose to dissent end in death; but that this choice is poetic or noble because a traditional sense of Justice is being served. It’s actually just revenge though, in my opinion, given what we learn of the target to be exfiltrated when Nadia returns to duty.
It constantly seems at odds, adding worldbuilding that is not present in the game; sometimes actually contradictory. It seems hard to believe that a person who pays for their plan and then is known to harm the trauma team would be something the corporation would disregard. If anything, it would heavily police those that pay and qualify with treatment, cancelling service. Why would they sacrifice equipment and Human Resources if they don’t have to? They’d just keep the money and jettison the person, free of liability, no?
So who is this story for?
Why is it attached to the game world? Perhaps if it wasn’t connected directly to the game, some of it would have worked? Nadia’s story, ultimately, lacks follow through, though. So I’m not sure how much would have resonated with me regardless. Just being another story where there’s no ostensibly viable option and so death is preferable is trite in cyberpunk. We should be attempting to explore much more interesting questions.