They're set in 1944, with the Nazis tryign to hold off the Red Army attacks. Let's look at those two campaigns for a moment. That's not to say this comes without problems, and further opportunities for criticism. What we have here is an all-encompassing World War II sim, that does more for Eastern Front battle antics than a couple of years of wargame releases. This is not a traditional FPS, despite its scripted campaign, and the real meat lies in the editor and the multiplayer, and not the two campaigns that the development team have clearly invested so much time in. There are plenty of fine World War II shooters, yes, and many of them are both atmospheric and slick, but what Iron Front does is something quite different – it tries to make a sim of that experience, with dramatic consequences. And those charges won't be baseless – I've seen a crash to desktop with this, the release version of the game – but they will generally miss the point. There will be the standard charges levelled at this, which are frequently levelled at its parent military sim, Arma 2, which is that it is fiddly, clunky, and occasionally buggy. Iron Front, with patriotic solider sim blood pumping in its veins, has charged out in the open, and is now exposed from all angles to headshots of leaden criticism. What's a man to do if he's bored with Arma 2, and tired of Day Z, but still wants meticulous rifle-toting in Bohemia's soldier sim engine? Should he look to history and pick up X1's Iron Front: Liberation 1944? Or is this a trip to the Eastern front too many? Here's wot I think.