I wasn't expecting to see a Starfield sequel any time soon, given it took Bethesda eight years to make its sci-fi RPG and the studio is currently focussed on The Elder Scrolls 6. But if the words of Starfield's former systems designer are anything to go by, we may not see a sequel to Bethesda's first new IP in 25 years at all.
In an interview with FRVR (via VGC), Bethesda veteran Kurt Kuhlmann explained why he doubts the studio will ever return to Starfield: "I would be very surprised", said Kuhlmann, who left Bethesda after Starfield was released. "I don't think Starfield was anywhere near successful enough to do a Starfield 2."
While specific sales figures for Starfield haven't been released, Bethesda's sci-fi RPG is estimated to have generated $300 million in revenue as of April this year. This would make Starfield profitable based on its reported budget of $200 million, but it still has a long way to go before it reaches Skyrim levels of success. Since Xbox has reportedly expressed a desire to focus on its major franchises, it seems likely that Bethesda will prioritise The Elder Scrolls and Fallout over Starfield.
Nonetheless, Kuhlmann thinks this may represent a missed opportunity for Bethesda to build on the lessons learned creating Starfield and create something truly special: "It's in a way, too bad, because I think with the lessons learned on Starfield, a Starfield 2 could have been much closer to the game that Todd had [in mind]."
One issue Kuhlmann thinks a sequel could address is Starfield's outpost building mechanic, which Kuhlmann believes was added to Starfield somewhat arbitrarily and wasn't sufficiently baked into the core experience. "You can build a base anywhere you want on a planet. For what it is, as a standalone system, it's cool, but it's not nearly as integrated with the rest of the game," he said.
In addition, Kuhlmann pointed out that Bethesda faced a similar problem with Fallout 4, and failed to learn the lesson. "It caused problems for it to be integrated with the story and the missions and stuff in Fallout 4, so it was kind of put to the side. Which begs the question of, well, why is it still in the game?" But apparently the decision to keep the system in Starfield was "above" him. "You might say 'Well, we shouldn't have it then if we're not going to integrate it with the story, then it's just this system sitting over there with a massive amount of work involved."
Personally, I think Starfield's problems were less to do with a superfluous outpost building mechanic, and more to do with narrative and systems design that was outclassed by games like Baldur's Gate 3 and even felt dated compared to older RPGs like The Witcher 3. Yet while a full sequel for Starfield may be unlikely, Bethesda has demonstrated long-term commitment to the original game thus far. It has continued to support the base game with both free updates and DLC, while in July, the studio stated that Starfield remains "an important part of our future".
