Skip to main content

Krome Studios set on more Blade Kitten related content

Company

Playstation Lifestyle goes indepth with Krome Studios Co-Founder, Creative Director, and creator of Blade Kitten, Steve Stamatiadis on the Blade Kitten game currently in development for the Playstation store. The questions at hand include why they've chosen the Playstation platform for their first DLC title, as well as the many design decisions behind the comic to game adaptation.

It looks like Krome Studios is set on the Blade Kiten IP, with plans on bringing more Blade Kitten episodes and content further down the track, including another game from the Blade Kitten universe. From Playstation Lifestyle..

SS: Currently we're finishing up episode one for release, working on episode 2 and planning another Blade Kitten release. Have to keep things moving.

Down the track we’re looking into some content for Home and definitely some downloadable costumes to purchase for use in game.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 14/05/10 - 12:09 PM Permalink

Because Microsoft rejected it.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 15/05/10 - 11:55 AM Permalink

Yep it's cool to hate Krome.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 15/05/10 - 10:57 PM Permalink

Really? You think that's why people don't like Krome? Because it's cool? There are no other reasons?

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 15/05/10 - 11:27 PM Permalink

That...

and the fact there is alot of butt hurt people that got sacked by krome in layoffs, that bi*ch , whine and flame, but if Krome offered them a job tomorrow would take it.

I'd take the job too, but i'm not gonna flame them.

I just hope that work picks up for the guys, and they can keep people employed, with some kind of stability.

the games industry is far too volatile.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 16/05/10 - 11:02 AM Permalink

hehe..Saying everyone who was laid off would return to Krome at the drop of a hat is absurd. I was made redundant and am actually a lot happier since i left. I'm not saying everyone is like me mind, but here's one person who'll never go back there.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 16/05/10 - 8:10 PM Permalink

Its true, you would all sell your right arm to work at Krome including those that lost their jobs. But that's not going to happen. Those people were chosen because they lacked the talent to work here.

I'm a TL at the Melb office and had input into who should go and who shouldn't. I have no trouble going to sleep at night knowing those that were let go deserved to go. Full Stop. End of story.

We are a strong company because we make tough decisions, if that means sticking for foreign workers because they have more talent then its for the good of the company.

But flame away. I have a job and am well paid for it. I get paid to make tough decisions.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 16/05/10 - 11:36 PM Permalink

my bs meter just went into overdrive. More like those who were let go just weren't very good at (or had no interest in playing) the game of office politics/self-promotion and self-preservation. These things have as much say as talent at a company like Krome.

**EDIT: specific case details removed, we get the point - Souri**

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 16/05/10 - 11:47 PM Permalink

Don't forget the junior artist who became involved in a relationship with her and subsequently took overseas trips to GDC and the like and became a senior.

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 16/05/10 - 11:47 PM Permalink

You were at Melbourne? I didn't work at Kromes Adelaide office but I know a few people who did and the following are facts:

1) Redundancies there happened almost uniformly based on seniority except for a couple of exceptional cases (as makes sense and I don't know anyone who is bitter about the choices of who got to stay)

2) The redundancy letter clearly stated that it was nothing to do with personal competence. If you are saying that is not the case then you are saying that those made redundant may have legal grounds against Krome as they were made redundant on false pretenses. Which is it?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 17/05/10 - 7:48 PM Permalink

If there are 5 level designers sitting around with nothing to do, and a project arises on the horizon that requires 3 level designers, is management going to save the 3 worst level designers and let go of the more experienced and skilled? Have a good hard think about that. Only a moronic employer, if faced with the need to make legitimate staff cuts, lets go of their best and brightest.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 17/05/10 - 10:48 PM Permalink

cool story champ

Redundancies are based on lack of work and too many staff.

If you've got 5 staff but only have work for 2, then 3 are redundant. Which 3 you choose to let go is up to you, and basing that decision on skill seems like a good choice.

Submitted by Mario on Wed, 19/05/10 - 11:59 AM Permalink

The issue with redundancies is that it isn't legal to use performance as a metric on which to decide who stays and who goes. The idea is that a redundancy is due to that position no longer being required due to a change in process, strategic direction, or lack of work etc. The focus is on the position, not the individual (even though the individual is of course affected).

On top of this, if you make somebody in a position redundant, you have to offer them that position back if you try to hire into the same role within a certain timeframe.

Of course, the reality is that most companies do use a metric such as performance to decide who stays and who goes. You just aren't supposed to (indeed, the law is unclear on whether you can use any kind of metric).

Note: my comments are made on my understanding of NZ employment law. I assume Australian law is similar enough that it holds for the most part.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 19/05/10 - 1:55 PM Permalink

Australia is pretty much the same, although i'm not sure about the "you have to offer them that position back if you try to hire into the same role within a certain timeframe" bit.
I do know many companies have done a lot of dodgy things with redundancies though. eg. a certain massive multinational developer with an office in melbourne lost a project and had to make everyone on that project redundant, but instead made some people on another project redundant and transferred some people from the lost project over.
According to the law, if you lose a project (or a project finishes and there is nothing to move onto) and have to make people redundant, it should be quite clear who should be made redundant (exactly the people working on that project). When the company isn't actually losing work, but is losing money (eg. changes in currency rates) it gets a little greyer. I'm sure in the case of a lot of the redundancies, there would be a case to be made against the employer by an employee for an unfair redundancy. But in the long run, it probably isn't going to benefit anyone except the lawyers.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 19/05/10 - 3:07 PM Permalink

I'm almost certain in Australia you *must* offer that position back to the person who lost it within about 6 months. If you fill it otherwise, big trouble.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 17/05/10 - 7:04 AM Permalink

Obviously the "I'm a TL at the Melb office" poster of above is not from Krome, and is trolling for trouble. No one from Krome thinks that - and even if there happened to be one or two that did, they would not be in a position to "Have a say who went or stayed". That poster is just an ass.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 17/05/10 - 11:01 PM Permalink

The last round of redundancies had nothing to do with the skill of those people.

Go look at the LinkedIn pages for the Melb staff who were let go -- how come they've all got recommendations their leads?

I can't comment on the Bris lay-offs though, I'm not privy to the politics up there.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 19/05/10 - 11:13 AM Permalink

The layoffs were because Krome is strapped for cash. High US dollar = no incentive to develope licenses in Australia, their track record is horrible (Luasarts walked away for this reason and Blade Kitten was rejected by MS) and they fire juniors to solve problems that are the fault of seniors so the problems continue.

Krome COULD work if it wasn't a friends-club.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 19/05/10 - 2:44 PM Permalink

Madness lies in thinking about it too much. If we hadn't screwed up Republic Heroes and to a lesser extent Lightsaber Duels there would be a lot more people employed at Krome right now. It's bittersweet that those of us who saw problems early on in those projects were ultimately proven correct that the approach being used would eventually cost us work.