Guardians Of Graxia Released, Cheap!

You'd think baddies would cheat and move before it was their turn.

While people are waiting for Petroglyph’s forthcoming MMORTS, End Of Nations (recognisable by there being sea there), there’s a whole other strategy game from the same developer that was released today. It’s Guardians Of Galaxia, a turn-based card game-cum board game strategy, the likes of which makes me feel a bit nervous. And it looks properly bonkers. And as Kieron pointed out last month, it’s a board game too! And it features fighting elephants.

The game describes itself like this:

Guardians of Graxia takes on the form of a card-based board game set in a floating island environment high in the sky of the Graxia world. Releasing with four powerful Guardians that will guide your armies into battle, charge onto the battlefield by laying out your forces strategically. Gameplay advances in turns by selecting new unit and spell cards to place and move on the tiled map surface. Ultimate victory is achieved by completing any of the numerous skirmishes, or by discovering the secrets of the Guardians in the game’s initial campaign!

Graxia is exclusively on GamersGate at the moment, where it’s a piddly £6.29. Which is surely worth a punt if you’re interested in the genre. Take a look at the brand new trailer below, too:


  1. Wolfox says:

    Here’s a link with some first impressions:

    link to

    I’m definitely interested. For $8.99, I might try it even with no professional reviews out. We’ll see.

  2. amanda says:

    Looks good. Needs more maps. Maybe there will be a map/scenario editor sometime.

  3. horrendous says:



    • adam says:

      Yeah, I hate that.

    • Kelron says:

      I’m fairly sure this is the only context in which “cum” is the correct spelling. What are you complaining about?

    • CreepingDeath says:

      Someone needs a dictionary

    • A-Scale says:

      Doesn’t mean it’s not inappropriate given the modern context.

    • MD says:

      He also used the word ‘bonkers’, which made me think of bonking. Also, apprently ‘punt’ has a dirty meaning. (I looked it up on Urban Dictionary.) Please, John, think of the children!

    • Wulf says:

      Intent matters, not words. That’s why I don’t particularly care about dirty words, I’m not fragile enough to be offended by such, I’m fairly open-minded. It’s the bloody ohties (soon to be the tenties), get with the times. Honestly. In my opinion, the only nasty words are those like ‘idiot’, ‘retard’, and ‘fag’, those that are used with the intent of offense. But they’re often used by unimaginative and not particularly well-read children, so it’s hard to take even those seriously.

      If you’re going to be offended by something, at least make sure it’s worth the effort of being offended by it. Like perhaps the poverty in the world whilst rich fat cats stuff their faces, that’s a good thing to be offended by. Or oil tycoons trying to do all they can to disprove global warming, that’s another fantastic thing to get angry over. Even politicians trying to rape poor people of their very last coin, taking away what makes our country great, now that’s a cause worthy of offense.

      Offended by ‘cum’? Don’t be so petty.

    • mwoody says:

      I can only assume those offended by Latin most certainly did not graduate cum laude.

    • Edgar the Peaceful says:

      Would you prefer ‘Spunk’ or ‘Spaff’ or ‘Duvet glue’ as my mate used to call it.

    • MD says:

      I know I was taking the piss earlier, but to be fair, nobody has actually said they were ‘offended’. It’s probably just a matter of perspective: to me, finding ‘cum’ inappropriate in this context is a bit ridiculous, but if he had used, say, ‘ejaculate’ for ‘exclaim’, I would have been thrown. Not offended, of course, but it would have seemed like an unnecessarily distracting choice of word.

    • Vague-rant says:

      Chill out people. Walker is using cum as both nature and grammar intended.

    • mujadaddy says:

      Walker is using cum as both nature and grammar intended.

      He’s procreating with a board game?

  4. pakoito says:

    I need a demo or a “demo” before playing it. Also, Steam.

    • Heliocentric says:

      I like demos, but ‘demo’ are bad, but do you know what is worse? ‘betas’.

    • pupsikaso says:

      I disagree. If there is no demo, then a ‘demo’ is very good indeed. Otherwise I’d not buy it anyway.

    • Eclipse says:

      it’s a cheap gamer from an indie developer, if you pirate even this games with the “no demo” excuse you just suck guys

    • pupsikaso says:

      Petroglyph is hardly indie O.o
      You know they are the remnants of Westwood Studios, right?

      Cheap or no, I’m not buying any game (over 5 dollars) without trying it out first. Regardless if it’s indie or not or who made it.

    • pakoito says:

      I suck. But my 10 bucks are mine and I only use them to pay for good games. Or paints of beer.

    • pakoito says:

      Also my netbook is crap, so it’s twice as worse if I’m gona pay for a game I cannot play.

      Demo plox.

    • sfury says:

      Plus if the game is shite you’d have wasted enough resources by just trying it. Time is money too. Or at least – a limited resource. ;)

      Seriously if they can’t cobble up a demo, at least think up some time trial version like Mount&Blade (which made me buy it), Burnout Paradise or thousands of others – big and small games.

  5. pupsikaso says:

    Anyone know if it has multiplayer?

    • apricotsoup says:

      “Guardians of Graxia will be released first as a solo game with potential additional releases later.”

      Looks very interesting, but the lack of being on steam makes me sad.

    • pupsikaso says:

      The lack of multiplayer breaks the deal for me. AI in these kind of games is so so notoriously bad.

  6. Freud says:

    I don’t know exactly why, but it looks like this game could be awesome.

  7. MadMatty says:

    Well, does look like its worth a look.
    Nice to behold- wonder what the rules are like and such- could go either way.

  8. John Peat says:

    I’m getting an “Eye of Judgement” feel to it (thinking more of the PSP version than the bonkers PS3 gadgetfest) – but with a bit more scope (and hopefully less AI cheating).

  9. Wulf says:

    I’m incredibly tempted by this, but afraid that the experience might be a bit shit due to bad AI. Still, it would scratch this itch I have for playing boardgames on a PC, since graphics make for a more fun board and all that. That’s probably the reason, anyway. But yes, I’m tempted to try this… not tempted enough to just outright buy it, though. Roll on reviews and possibly a demo!

    • pkt-zer0 says:

      I don’t like the graphics, actually. It’s too visually busy, the plain board-game version is likely a lot more readable.

  10. Anthony Damiani says:

    Too bad it doesn’t seem to be available on Steam, cost it my purchase.

  11. ShawnClapper says:

    I like the huge creatures on a board game idea. Too bad the cheesy rpg style/music is not my taste at all. Kind of like how RUSE looked cool with it’s board game look but ended up not being what I wanted either. Soon someone will make my type of game with this neat board game style!

  12. Adam Babloyan says:

    Isn’t TRION making End of Nations? Or is that another MMORTS altogether?

    I’m a bit confused here.

    • pupsikaso says:

      Trion Worlds is publishing End of Nations. Petroglyph Games is making it.

    • pupsikaso says:

      But what really confuses me is how many games Petroglyph is able to work on at once. While they were working on Mytheon, which isn’t finished yet, they’ve released the Panzer General games. And now while still working on Mytheon, they’ve release these Graxia games. And on top of that they are also working on End of Nations!
      What the…

  13. Adam Babloyan says:

    Ah, that clears things up a bit thank you pup.

  14. Gothnak says:

    Thanks RPS, i’ll be buying this tonight!


  15. AnonAnonAnon says:

    Wahhh, wahhh, it’s not on Steam.

    And people still wonder why everyone hates PC gamers.

  16. Chaz says:

    Giant tree people, huge battle elephants, flying lizard things; nope, doesn’t remind me at all of Lord of The Rings.

  17. Scioptic says:

    I totally misread the headline to be Guardians of the Galaxy and thought that was the mighty Groot stomping round in the picture… how disappointed I was when I read it properly :(

    • Latro says:

      Well, the link says “Guardian of Galaxia”, so … RPS guys, please fix.

      I’ll tell you wot I think after I play it – just bought it without any other reference but “boardgame” and “less than 9 €” :-P

  18. datoo says:

    This game looks really cool, but I’m definitely not buying without multiplayer.

  19. John Peat says:

    It’s now on Steam – so no more moaning here eh? :)

  20. Severian says:

    Just wanted to drop in on this post and give some feedback about the game:

    There were some major stability issues at first, but a new patch just came out today and seems to have resolved most of the major bugs.

    This is great value for the money. The base-game has great strategic depth and a small map-expansion pack was released (for just a couple dollars), which adds several more scenarios.

    The AI is very challenging, and oddly enough, seems to fully understand the rules of the game. It plays strategically, which is all the more impressive given the complexity of the system. Players need to juggle attack/defense values, range/melee attacks, spell costs, short-term vs. long-term goals, terrain adjustments, support and reinforcement, special abilities, and more. And the AI does it all. I’d hesitate to say this is one of the most impressive AI’s I’ve come across in a single-player TBS.

    Recommended, if you like small-scale TBS strategy with slightly abstracted rules.