Success Won’t Change the Formula
Despite selling over 5 million copies and becoming one of 2025’s breakout indie hits, Sandfall Interactive has no plans to expand into a large AAA studio. In interviews with Automaton and Eurogamer published October 8, 2025, creative director Guillaume Broche stated unequivocally that even with unlimited budget and resources, the team wouldn’t radically change their approach. “I don’t think we would have wanted to radically add unnecessary content or change the overall scope of our game,” Broche explained, arguing that having a “limited budget and resources is helpful to narrow down the scope of a title and distill the vision to the core elements that make it great.”
This philosophical stance directly contradicts the typical gaming industry trajectory where successful indie studios scale up aggressively for sequels, often losing the creative agility that made their debut special. Sandfall’s leadership across multiple interviews consistently emphasizes remaining under 50 people, working in one physical location (Montpellier, France), focusing on one project at a time, and maintaining the “art house” mentality that allowed a debut studio to compete with AAA productions on critical reception if not budget scale.
The Anti-Padding Philosophy
Broche’s most provocative claim is that bigger budgets might have actually harmed Expedition 33’s quality. “I think part of the reason some fans enjoyed their time with our game was how we tried to respect the players’ time by not artificially padding out the game time excessively,” he told Automaton. “Maybe having unlimited scope and budget would’ve made it a less engaging game for our players.” This directly challenges the AAA industry’s tendency toward bloated 80-100 hour open worlds filled with repetitive side content that dilutes focused narratives.
Expedition 33 clocks in at approximately 20-25 hours for main story completion, with another 10 hours of genuinely challenging optional content. This tighter scope contrasts sharply with contemporary RPGs that stretch to 50-80 hours through padding, fetch quests, and empty open-world filler. Games Radar’s interview highlights how Sandfall deliberately avoided this trap: “Not artificially padding out the game time excessively was key to the RPG’s success.”
| Studio Principle | Sandfall’s Approach |
|---|---|
| Team Size | Stay under 50 people core team |
| Project Count | One project at a time, no simultaneous development |
| Location Strategy | Single physical location (Montpellier) for collaboration |
| Hiring Philosophy | 200+ interviews for initial hires, quality over quantity |
| Budget Approach | AA scope prevents padding and scope creep |
| Creative Vision | “Art house” mentality over commercial maximization |
| External Support | Outsource QA, localization, marketing to specialists |
The Actual Team Size Behind Expedition 33
Understanding Sandfall’s philosophy requires clarifying their actual development structure. While headlines often cite “30 people made this game,” the reality is more nuanced. The core internal team at Sandfall consisted of approximately 30-35 developers working full-time in Montpellier. However, CEO Guillaume Broche detailed the actual breakdown: “We had five people working on environments, two on the story. And I think, about three to six people worked on the cinematics. The music was done by four people.”
Beyond this core, Sandfall utilized extensive external support. Contract voice actors (around 30 performers), outsourced QA testing, localization teams, marketing specialists, and animation support from partner studios brought the total contributor count to 60-90 people depending on how you measure. Chief tech officer Tom Guillermin clarified: “While the game did have the support of external partners for QA, localisation, marketing and other tasks, the core development team was relatively small.”
This hybrid model reflects what Jason Schreier advocated in “Blood, Sweat, and Pixels” – engaging specialized studios for specific tasks rather than building massive internal teams handling everything. Sandfall excels at knowing what to keep in-house (creative vision, core gameplay, narrative) versus what to outsource (technical QA, translation, motion capture). This agility let them punch far above their weight class against AAA competitors.
Why They’re Staying Small for the Next Game
When asked about future projects, Sandfall’s leadership was adamant about maintaining current team size. Chief tech officer Tom Guillermin told Automaton: “I think that, for now, I’d prefer working as a small team. I’m not sure how big ‘an ideal team’ would be, but when it comes to making a full-priced turn-based RPG, I believe that the team we have now is just the right size.”
Producer François Meurisse elaborated on this philosophy to Games Industry: “For now, our vision would be to stick to a close team working in the same city with less than 50 people on board, focusing on one project after another, and keeping this agility, and this creative strength, and smartness of a small group of passionate people wanting to do something big.” He cited examples like Ocarina of Time and Half-Life 2, which were created by teams of 60-70 people yet remain legendary decades later.
The emphasis on “one project after another” is particularly significant. Many successful studios scale up to work on multiple projects simultaneously – sequels, DLC, new IP. Sandfall explicitly rejects this model, recognizing that creative cohesion suffers when teams fragment across multiple concurrent developments. “We won’t start working on multiple projects simultaneously,” Meurisse confirmed. “We want to keep the organisation that made us successful.”
The Hiring Philosophy That Enables Quality
Sandfall’s ability to succeed with a small team stems from rigorous hiring standards. Broche revealed they “conducted over 200 interviews in order to gather the first team members,” prioritizing “hungry young talent over experienced veterans.” This approach values potential, passion, and alignment with studio vision over impressive résumés from AAA studios.
The result is what Super Jump Magazine described as a team “in sync from day one” without siloed departments working independently. “This isn’t a combat design team that worked separately from the narrative team, who also worked separately from the RPG mechanics team. No one was siloed, blocked off by layers of bureaucracy and management. This is a studio that worked as one, in complete and total unison.”
This unified creative vision manifests in Expedition 33’s remarkable cohesion. Combat, narrative, progression, aesthetics, and music all feel like expressions of a single artistic vision rather than components designed separately then stitched together. Guillermin noted that “every member of the team was highly skilled,” enabling the small size to work because each person contributed at exceptionally high levels.
External Validation of the Approach
Industry figures have publicly endorsed Sandfall’s philosophy. Former PlayStation head Shuhei Yoshida called Expedition 33 a “perfect balance” of AAA ambition, AA budget, and “independent vision.” Newly appointed Jagex CEO Jon Bellamy cited the game as proof you can achieve results “not so different” from AAA productions using “a tenth” of typical $400 million budgets if executed properly.
These endorsements matter because they come from executives who’ve overseen massive AAA productions and understand industry economics intimately. Their validation suggests Sandfall’s approach isn’t just romantic idealism about small teams but a genuinely viable alternative business model that can compete on quality while maintaining sustainable costs and creative agility.
The Budget Question Nobody Will Answer
One detail Sandfall and publisher Kepler Interactive refuse to disclose is Expedition 33’s actual budget. Kepler’s Alex Handrahan told Games Industry: “Everybody’s desperate to know what the budget is, and I won’t tell them, but I would guarantee if you got 10 people to guess, I think all 10 wouldn’t guess the actual figure. I’m sure Mirror’s Edge and Vanquish cost more, put it that way.”
That comparison is revealing. Mirror’s Edge (2008) reportedly cost around $40-50 million, while Vanquish (2010) likely had similar budgets adjusted for inflation. If Expedition 33 cost less than those mid-tier PS3/Xbox 360 era productions, we’re talking potentially $15-30 million – a fraction of typical AAA budgets that now routinely exceed $100-200 million for major RPGs.
The mystery serves Sandfall’s interests by allowing the success story to scale to different interpretations. To indie developers, it’s proof small teams can compete. To AAA publishers questioning bloated budgets, it demonstrates potential cost efficiency. By not confirming figures, Sandfall lets everyone project their preferred narrative onto Expedition 33’s business model.
What ‘Art House’ Means for Sandfall
Broche’s description of Sandfall as a “small art house, where we make games that we love and want to play” encapsulates their identity. Art house cinema prioritizes artistic vision over commercial calculation, taking creative risks larger studios won’t touch. Applying this philosophy to gaming means Sandfall can pursue projects driven by passion rather than market research and focus groups.
Eurogamer’s interview captured this mindset: “And that will continue, even despite its success, as it allows the team to take risks, be agile, and innovate. ‘We know how to make a game with a team our size, a game we love, so that’s something we want to do again.'” Success doesn’t change the approach because the approach itself – not just commercial outcomes – defines Sandfall’s identity and purpose.
Indie, AA, or Triple-I?
Classification debates around Expedition 33 frustrate Sandfall because they miss the point. When Eurogamer asked about being indie versus AA, Broche responded: “We don’t really care, to be honest. We are very much independent on everything we do. I’d say probably the most accurate would be triple-I, because we are not really small, but we are also on the very lower end of AA production budgets and team size. We are not bothered that much by any classification, it doesn’t really matter.”
Triple-I (independent with AAA ambition) better captures Sandfall’s position than traditional categories. They’re independent financially and creatively but aim for production values and scope typically associated with much larger teams and budgets. This emerging category includes studios like Larian (Baldur’s Gate 3), FromSoftware (Elden Ring), and others proving mid-sized teams can compete with industry giants on quality if not raw budget.
Community Response – Respect Mixed With Skepticism
Reddit discussions about Sandfall’s commitment to staying small show appreciation mixed with practical concerns. Many developers and fans praise the principled stance against chasing growth for growth’s sake, recognizing how scaling up often destroys what made studios special. Comments highlight how BioWare, Bungie, and others lost creative identity when they expanded beyond manageable sizes.
However, skeptics question whether this philosophy survives long-term pressures. With 5 million sales at $50-60 per copy generating potentially $250-300 million gross revenue (before platform cuts, taxes, and publisher splits), Sandfall and Kepler are positioned for significant profits. Maintaining small team discipline when swimming in success money requires discipline that defeats many studios once resources stop being the limiting factor.
The Sequel Question
While Sandfall hasn’t announced their next project, the commitment to staying small suggests it won’t be “Expedition 34” with doubled scope and budget. Broche told Eurogamer: “We don’t plan to grow the company that much…even for the next game. We don’t necessarily want to make something bigger. We want to make something as good, if not better, and that’s all that matters. The size is not really important, I think.”
This “as good if not better” framing rejects the sequel escalation trap where follow-ups must be BIGGER and MORE. Instead, Sandfall focuses on quality improvement and creative innovation within similar scope constraints. This mirrors FromSoftware’s approach between Dark Souls games or Team Cherry’s philosophy with Hollow Knight – iterating and refining rather than inflating.
FAQs
How big is Sandfall Interactive’s development team?
Sandfall’s core internal team is approximately 30-35 people working in Montpellier, France. They utilize extensive external support (voice actors, QA, localization, marketing) bringing total contributors to 60-90 depending on measurement, but plan to keep the core team under 50 even after Expedition 33’s success.
Would Sandfall expand with unlimited budget?
No. Creative director Guillaume Broche explicitly stated they wouldn’t radically change scope even with unlimited resources, arguing that budget constraints helped distill vision to core elements and that unlimited budgets might have made Expedition 33 worse through artificial padding.
What was Clair Obscur’s actual budget?
Sandfall and publisher Kepler Interactive won’t disclose the exact budget. Kepler’s Alex Handrahan suggested it cost less than mid-tier PS3/Xbox 360 games like Mirror’s Edge or Vanquish, implying potentially $15-30 million versus typical AAA budgets exceeding $100-200 million.
Is Sandfall making an Expedition 33 sequel?
Sandfall hasn’t announced their next project. Director Broche stated they don’t want to make something “bigger” but rather “as good, if not better,” suggesting the next game will maintain similar scope constraints rather than pursuing typical sequel escalation.
Why won’t Sandfall expand after 5 million sales?
Sandfall believes small team size enables creative cohesion, agility, and the “art house” mentality that made Expedition 33 successful. They fear expansion would introduce bureaucracy, silos, and committee decision-making that compromises creative vision.
What does ‘art house’ mean for game development?
Broche describes Sandfall as a “small art house where we make games that we love and want to play,” prioritizing artistic vision and creative risks over commercial calculation and market research – similar to art house cinema versus blockbuster movies.
How did such a small team make a AAA-quality game?
Sandfall conducted 200+ interviews to hire exceptionally skilled team members, maintained unified creative vision without departmental silos, outsourced specialized tasks to expert partners, and focused scope on core strengths rather than trying to match AAA breadth.
What team size made Ocarina of Time and Half-Life 2?
Producer François Meurisse cited these legendary games as having development teams of 60-70 people maximum – similar to Sandfall’s target size and proof that small focused teams can create genre-defining experiences.
Conclusion
Sandfall Interactive’s commitment to remaining small despite Clair Obscur: Expedition 33’s extraordinary commercial success represents a principled rejection of conventional gaming industry wisdom that equates growth with progress. Their argument that unlimited budgets might have actually harmed the game through scope creep and artificial padding challenges AAA assumptions about bigger always being better, while their emphasis on focused teams working in physical proximity on single projects contradicts trends toward distributed development and multi-project studios. Whether this philosophy survives long-term success remains to be seen – maintaining discipline when resources stop being constraints requires saying no to tempting opportunities, and history shows many studios unable to resist expansion pressures once money flows freely. However, the examples Sandfall cites – small legendary teams behind Ocarina of Time, Half-Life 2, and similar classics – prove their approach has historical precedent for creating genre-defining work. The true test comes with their second project, where the novelty advantage disappears and expectations skyrocket. If Sandfall delivers another Expedition 33-level success with similar team size and scope, they’ll have validated a genuinely alternative development model that AAA publishers would be foolish to ignore. For now, their stance offers inspiration to developers drowning in bloated teams and committee decisions, proving that thoughtful restraint and unified creative vision can compete with industry behemoths willing to spend hundreds of millions chasing market trends rather than artistic excellence.