According to GameSpot, Sandfall Interactive’s debut game, *Clair Obscur: Expedition 33*, was a major 2025 breakout hit, selling over 5 million copies and winning a record nine awards at The Game Awards, including Game of the Year. Despite this immense commercial and critical success, studio boss Guillaume Broche says the team will not scale up for its next project, even though they now have the financial means to do so. Broche’s philosophy is to “adapt the game to the team, and not the other way around,” arguing that creative limitations are beneficial. He stated that the management team prefers being hands-on and making games over managing a larger staff, wanting to preserve the happiness they felt during the five-year development of *Expedition 33*. The game’s success has been somewhat marred by controversy, including The Indie Game Awards revoking its Game of the Year win due to AI concerns and debates over its “independent” designation.
A Refreshing Antidote to Growth-at-All-Costs
Here’s the thing: in an industry where success is almost always measured by scaling up, hiring hundreds, and chasing even bigger budgets, Sandfall’s stance is downright radical. And incredibly refreshing. Broche is basically saying the quiet part out loud: managing people is often a distraction from the actual craft of making games. He’s prioritizing the team’s creative fulfillment and quality of life over potential revenue from a larger operation. That’s a gamble, but it’s one born from a place of artistic sincerity that’s become all too rare. How many studios have we seen balloon after a hit, only to lose their identity and crumble under the weight of their own overhead?
The Stakeholder Impact: Stability Over Speculation
So what does this mean for everyone else? For players, it’s promising. It suggests Sandfall’s next game will likely have the same focused, “strong soul and identity” that Broche champions, rather than being a bloated, committee-designed sequel. For developers at the studio, it means stability and continued creative ownership—a huge win for morale in a field known for crunch and burnout. For the broader market, it’s a powerful case study. It proves that a lower-budget, passionately made game can still dominate in a landscape of blockbuster sequels, and that sustainable, human-scale development is a viable business model. That’s a hopeful signal for other indie and mid-size teams.
The Inevitable Pressure of What’s Next
Now, let’s not pretend this path is without its own intense pressure. Broche admits their next project has “very big shoes to fill.” Choosing to stay small means the expectations for their follow-up act haven’t shrunk at all; if anything, the spotlight is brighter. They’ve set a incredibly high bar for themselves in terms of both quality and commercial performance. Can they capture lightning in a bottle twice with the same core team size? That’s the billion-dollar question. But their decision also insulates them somewhat. They’re not on the hook for massive payroll if the next game underperforms. It’s a conservative creative strategy that manages financial risk, even as it embraces artistic ambition.
A Human Philosophy in an Age of Algorithms
Perhaps the most compelling part of Broche’s comments is the core creative tenet: “[try to] not care too much about the players.” That sounds wild, right? But his point is nuanced. He’s arguing against design-by-committee and chasing trends, and for making something sincere that the developers themselves love. In an era where live-service metrics and engagement algorithms often drive design, this is a throwback to auteur-driven game-making. It embraces little flaws as part of a work’s humanity. After the AI controversy they faced, doubling down on this human-centric, hands-on philosophy might also be a strategic way to reaffirm their artistic credibility. They’re not just making a product; they’re crafting an experience with a specific point of view. And in a crowded market, that point of view might be their greatest asset.
