"I don't feel good about the industry, but I feel good about the ability for people to create games that can find an audience." Interview with Josh Sawyer

If you ever get the chance to speak with a man who co-created the games that shaped your RPG sensibilities, you take it. That’s what happened to me at Digital Dragons 2025 in Krakow, where I’ve met the man, the myth, the legend himself, the creator of some of my – and yours, probably – favourite, formative RPGs, both modern and classics. Here’s the interview with Josh freakin’ Sawyer.

I’ve spoken with the designer about his approach to the RPG genre, his past failures and successes, the lessons he did learn, about the state of the industry. We’ve touched Obsidian’s games, mostly Pentiment and Pillars of Eternity. That’s how I got to know what his vision for Pillars of Eternity 3 is (though it isn’t a big secret).

So I invite you all for the ride, and have a small request for big industry players. Dear Xbox and Microsoft – give Josh Sawyer a proper truckload(s) of money for PoE 3 and let the man do his magic.

Hubert Sosnowski: Josh, what's more important in deg RPGs and games in general for you? Story or numbers and mechanics?

Josh Sawyer: I always loved the numbers, but I think that ultimately the reason people come to our games is for the story, the player’s story. The player's ability to feel like they have agency not only in how they complete quests and storylines, but also their ability to shape the story, make alliances, betray people, and other things like that. So I think that is what people really care about in Obsidian's role-playing games. I mean, I always love the numbers. I love working on that stuff. But if I had to pick one, that's going to be the story.

HS: So what goes first, when YOU design the game?

JS: I conceive an idea, a setting, and maybe an inciting event, and a couple of mechanics that, I believe, are really key and iconic, and then things develop more organically over time. Even in Pentiment, I had clear images in my head for key events, but I didn't have the story entirely worked out. I knew that it was going to be very light mechanically and that I wanted choice and consequence to be very important. I had the idea of the backgrounds where you were an artist, but you were universally educated. I had all of that very early on, and then things develop more organically.

So I don't have a whole story formed at the beginning of a project. I have a concept of a starting point, maybe a midpoint, maybe an endpoint. But when it comes to details, I prefer to let us figure that out over time. I found that I've also worked on projects where I go for it really aggressively and try to figure out all the story beats right away, and they always change, and it's always too much. If I do it that way, most of the team is not on board. If I have a few key points and can talk through them, we kind of do it more together.

HS: Was it always your way?

JS: I think it's something you learn over time. Early in my career, I really wanted to nail everything down story-wise in excruciating detail as early as possible. One, I usually didn't do a good job. Two, I didn't have most of the team engaged during that process. And then three, I wound up throwing out a lot and changing things. The thing is, your story takes place within the content of the game. Until you actually understand the scope of your game, you don't know how big your story can really be. So if you're relying on very key things to happen before you know what the game is, you basically can't do that super early. So I started off doing it in a way that, now in retrospect, is not very good. Then over time, I think I've just refined it.

HS: Regardless of your approach, you are one of the people who, alongside their teams, influenced the RPG genre basically. For a long time, a lot of RPGs were isometric, then the focus shifted to action RPGs. Now, there are different approaches like Kingdom Come, Baldur’s Gate 3, Clair Obscur, Disco Elysium, and Pentiment. What is the future of the genre, where it's heading?

JS: I feel like the spectrum of RPGs that can be made and find an audience now is wider than it's ever been. The game industry is in a really bad state right now, and there are lots of reasons for that, but like one of the challenges that devs face is that there's just a profusion of games. It's hard to even get noticed with a new game. But I really do believe that more so now we can have isometric games, we can have super indie-lean games, we can have games that are retro, Elder Scrolls-type games that are made by smaller developers, and things like that.

And then we can have the big blockbusters. We can do that stuff too. And yeah, you can have something that's crazy like Kingdom Come Deliverance 2, that came out within a week or two of each other, and they're both first-person, but they're also very different. And I think it's really cool. And some people like both. Some people are just going to like one. I'm really into history, especially Central European history, so I think it's very cool that we can have that game, which is so well-received and reviewed, and then we can have very different RPGs that excel in other things and have a very different flavor to them.

So I don't feel good about the industry, but I feel good about the ability for people to create games that can find an audience. As long as they can tailor the resources they spend on that experience for the audience, they can achieve success. And I think that's awesome.

HS: That's the broader picture, but what do you, as a designer, prefer right now? What type of RPGs or games in general would you like to do now? Something smaller, like Pentiment, or something bigger and more mainstream? Or maybe you still have a heart for an isometric blockbuster?

JS: Pentiment was, sort of, the last of my games that I needed to make. When I got into the industry, my dream was to make a Advanced Dungeons & Dragons game, which I got to make immediately, and then too many of them [laughs]. I was at Black Isle when I realized that I wanted to make a historical game. It took me 20 years, but now, with Pentiment, I have made it all. Now I'm less concerned with making a specific game at a specific time. It's more about what the team needs? Is there a really strong idea? I would make a big game if there were great ideas behind it and if there was a team that was super ionate about it.

But the same team could also maybe be focused on the mid-size game or a tactical game. I'm happy making big games, small games, medium games, as long as I really believe in the vision of it, and I can get excited, and if my team can get excited. So, regardless of what I want to do, if I can't get a group of people that is super-stoked to do it, there's no point. It's really just about the specific idea and a group of people.

HS: Speaking about excitement and emotions in general… I noticed some patterns in Obsidian games. They seem more intellectual and more focused on the concepts of society, religion, and similar stuff. On the other side, we're living in the times when emotions rule. Romances, big betrayals, it has to be big and bombastic. How hard is it to operate and design something that's focused on the contrary aspect (though it’s not undermining emotions)?

JS: I can't speak for any other director or writer, but I know that because we're often trying to present lots of different ways of thinking and ways of approaching a problem, different factions, philosophies, outlooks on how the world should work. It can become a little less emotional, not without emotion, but it earns more towards being a little more thoughtful. And because of that, usually I don't want to get too weird about this or push away from the intellectual concerns versus the emotional concerns.

For example, if we have a character that's part of a faction and that character is really emotionally load-bearing in the story compared to another character, that really could buy us the way that the player thinks about that faction, if that makes sense. And I don't know if that's necessarily a conscious decision. We kind of try to present a lot of different facets and ways of looking at things. I think it's a natural byproduct of the way our companions function - they are very often optional in our stories. They represent factions that you may like or you may hate. And so there's a little bit of a distance that comes with them.

I think with Pentiment, I did make a very concerted effort to keep both the emotional content very rich and strong, along with a lot of the themes that were being explored. And for me, it was kind of an experiment because I don't think that I had merged things that successfully in other games I’d worked on. So yeah, that was a big focus. But in general, we have a level of separation, if not alienation, between character moments, stories, and the ideas that get discussed. Not always, but I think that's a trend.

HS: OK. So, Pentiment was the game that struck the balance between these factors. And I believe it's true because those who played were very engaged in The Pentiment. I'm wondering when this path really started. Correct me if I'm wrong. But I saw that shift between Pillars of Eternity 1 and Neverwinter Nights 2, that was so straightforward with emotions. Am I right, or is it just my perspective?

JS: I think you're right. I think part of it is that our factions were present in the game more consistently, and we tied companions to the factions a little more tightly. You have Serafen representing the Principi, you have Maia representing the Royal Dead Fire Company, and so on. There's a little more emotional connective tissue between those. And then there were the religious concepts, the colonial issues, which are, in one way, logical, but also very emotional. The characters care a lot about them. I do think there was maybe more connection between the ideas, the characters, and how their plots played out.

HS: I'm asking a lot about Pillars of Eternity because I think it was an important moment in Obsidian's history. I know your Digital Dragons Postmortem about it, but from the perspective of time, what were your favorite things about PoE 2, and what was… not so much a favorite? I'm asking from the perspective of someone who gave a high note for the Deadfire.

JS: Thank you! In retrospect, I still think the art is outstanding. Kaz Aruga and Sean Dunny, and everyone else on the art team did an amazing job. Unfortunately, they did have to crunch quite a bit toward the middle and end of the game to get that stuff done, but they’ve created something special. People will get mad at me for this, but I think it is the best-looking 2D isometric game. It's just it's incredible - and I can't take credit for it [laughs]. That's the team.

I am really happy with how we portrayed themes that we explored, especially in of colonialism. Arguably, we put one faction too many, but I felt that was necessary because very often in our world, there are multiple colonial factions fighting around a native culture. And I'm pretty happy with how that was handled, even if it didn't integrate with the other storylines as well.

I understand the criticisms of the critical path. It's my responsibility, I think it's fair. But the writers did some really great work, and they should be proud of it. And then there are the mechanics we refined, I had help from system designers on Pillars 2. They did some really great work on how the AI works for enemies, which also became the AI trigger-conditional system for players. They also perfected the multi-classing system. And again, this is not me myself. It's a team, and I'm really happy that I still see people talking about class strategies and build strategies. Mortismall Gaming just completed the Ultimate, which is really cool.

HS: It's crazy, I saw that - and I love his channel!.

JS: [Nods and smiles]. I'm really glad with where it ended up mechanically. You know, I think that if we did have the chance in the future, you know… Well, I've said this before and some people are really, really bummed out about it, but I think if we did go into a 3D environment, we could patch up one of the things that's really lacking. Because it is isometric, there's no sense of height, and the environment can't be that dynamic. When you compare it to something like BG3, you realise it's such a huge part of the appeal. I think, at some point, I would like to see a game that used all those Deadfire mechanics, plus more environmental mechanics, elevation hazards, and dynamic terrain stuff. That could be super-cool.

HS: Did you just portray the secret pitch for Pillars of Eternity 3? I know it's unofficial, but I'm one of the guys who would sacrifice a lot of modern games from a lot of studios just to play the PoE3

JS: Our team did an incredible job on Deadfire, for a number of reasons. I think that a third game should be an isometric 3D with an environment more like Baldur’s Gate 3; it would work. And I think that could be really awesome. It would be easier for us to make the art and be a lot more dynamic. I've said this before, so hopefully nobody will get mad [laughs]. I think there's a lot of cool stuff that we could do with it.

HS: Fingers crossed! By the way, there's one more mechanic that I really adore in PoE2. It's the housing-shipping system. I didn’t understand the combat, but the rest was superb, all-in-one. Quarters, vehicle, hub, and it solved a lot of economic problems of the RPGs. You always had to spend money, it kept the economy in balance. I'm wondering if you're going to repeat this in any game. Because newer Obsidian games (like The Outer Worlds) use simplified versions of that…

JS: You know, I can't speak for other directors, but we really just looked at the Normandy and said: “Well, what if you could customize the Normandy more and make it a money sink?”. We did like the idea of the crew taking in NPCs and stuff like that. Ship combat did not work out very well, but a lot of people at the studio like the idea of a ship that is also your home and the way to move between areas. Unlike a keep or a stronghold, which you don't really have to go to unless you're forced to, which doesn't feel good. But a ship - it feels more natural, because of course I have to get into my ship to travel, because I have to go across the ocean or outer space or whatever. I think that BioWare did a great job with the Normandy on that sort of structure. We just took that and tried to elaborate on it. So there were aspects of the ship that weren't executed well, but I still think it was a pretty solid idea.

HS: Yes, it was. By the way, what's your dream-like RPG or game in general to make?

JS: I don't even know anymore. Again, people will suggest ideas for games, and I'd answer: “That could be awesome and like it.” It depends on what the scope of it is, what the team size is, what the budget is, all that sort of stuff. So I don't think I have a game like that anymore. But I like making Obsidian-style RPGs. I like making games where your choices are important. You can really role-play. You see the consequences of your actions.

I like the idea of hard trade-offs and bittersweet endings based on the things that you do. And I always like being in a little bit of crunch. You know, Pentiment is the first game I worked on, where there's basically no crunch at all, which was cool. But generally speaking, I like a little bit of number crunch. I like a little bit of stat noise and things like that to mess around with. It's just kind of my vibe.

HS: So you’re just waiting for the proper moment, idea, or something like that?

JS: Yes. At this point in my career, I feel like whatever moment I'm at, whoever I'm with, it has to be kind of the right game for the moment in the team. And so that'll change. And then, like in a couple of years, it'll be maybe something else, and we'll see, and I'll just go from there.

HS: So that's a great example of living in the moment, something rare in the industry!

JS: Thank you very much. I mean, I think I've been very privileged that I've been in the industry for 26 years now, and 20 of them at the same studio. I've been pretty lucky. I've had some games that got cancelled and some disappointments, but I've had a really good career. And so at this point, it's about the right group of people being into it. It's more about the team and their enjoyment and making sure that they're being treated right and that we can have a good time together and make something that people can enjoy. I'm less concerned about whether it's big or little or even the specifics of it.

HS: OK. Thank you for a very positive and calm note for the end! I think we all needed that.

JS: Thank you as well!