Consider the following:

From a programming perspective, DLCs cannot reference each other. Why? Because not everyone buys all the DLCs. If they referenced each other and one of the DLCs was missing, then you've got a game error that could cause bugs or crashes.
Dawnguard gave us a lycanthropy perk tree, but no werebears. The problem? Well, if they release Werebears in, say, Hearthfire, they WON'T benefit from the lycanthropy perk tree. This forces them to either make a perk tree that's awkwardly named "Lycanthropy Junior" or to simply NOT give them a perk tree, which risks making them too weak by comparison.

Dawnguard also provides recognition for werewolves. Dialog options address if you're a werewolf and NPCs react differently if you are. Infact when you first get the offer to transform into a VL, you're warned you'll lose your werewolf status if you do so. The game will not let you be both. However, if werebears were released in Hearthfire, the Dawnguard DLC would have 0 way of knowing you're a werebear because the coding for werebears would be foreign to it; it can't reference it at all. This means the game wouldn't be able to prevent you from being both a werebear and a VL.

Finally, why can't you become a werewolf over and over? You CAN become a VL over and over, but for werewolf? You only get two shots. There's also werewolves in the wild, but only Aela can turn you into a werewolf. Why?
While limiting it to TWO, I can't explain, I think I have an idea why Aela governs werewolf status: because the game could potentially bug out if you join the Companions AS a werewolf and then you go to gain werewolf powers. Could this have been fixed? Yes it could've; I'm not saying it's not doable, but for whatever reason they did NOT make it so werewolves in the wild can give you their disease. The only LOGICAL explanation I can think of is that it was impossible for them to do so without going back and re-touching and re-spec'ing the Companion questline quite a bit. Obviously they opted out of doing so. The result? Well now, if this same approach (not touching the companions) remains for whenever werebears are introduced, then the Companions will NOT react to you being a werebear and there's a potential problem. Thus werebears are a problem altogether.


Those are three ways I see that sort of make implementing werebears at this point an undesirable perspective for Bethesda. Mind you, this is all speculation of course, but I think it's something to consider.

What is the big deal about them?
Are people only wanting Werebears because it's the "cool" thing to want?

It's because pre-Skyrim release, werebears were mentioned in lore as being "UH BIG FRIGGIN' PROBLEM IN SKYRIM, HOLY HELL DEY EVERYWHAR," then come Skyrim's release they're uhhh...missing.

It has to do with hints and the promise of a different breed of lycanthropy that gets people's hopes up, serves as a unique cornerstone of the Skyrim lore and culture that we're already familiar with, and then it's just completely missing and we get something completely different.

I don't think anyone is really of the opinion that werebears is like the best thing ever, but rather they'd just like to see these powerful and deadly werebears we heard so much about. What I don't get is I'm convinced that if they simply made the Companions wereBEARS instead of wereWOLVES, but functionally the same as we have now, people would be more than pleased. Instead they opted not to use them at all...

Is this Dovah bear using like a mule or something?

That first point is a non-issue as I have said before. You never see the other perk trees. You can see a VL perk tree when in VL form, a WW perk tree in WW form, and potentially a WB perk tree in WB form. Hell, why not a werelion too, you could easily add limitless lycanthropes. All their perk trees are called Lycanthropy; You see them when you are one and only then.

Dialogue in Dawnguard is an issue. Do they call you werewolf or wolf or just beast? If they call you beast, Werebears could tick the same flag as werewolves, with an additional flag to make NPCs who talk specifically about bears to notice you're a bear.

In the base game, it can be changed.

EDIT: Ahh, I saw your post on the other thing regarding the first. Maybe they simply felt it'd be too much of a weird thing to just toss them in with no associated plotline? All other transformation/disease things now have plot and backstory.

We'll see whether or not we'll be getting them, I'm fairly certain in a team as large as Bethesda's at least one guy has noticed the issue.

I didnt think they'd be in DG, and HEY! they werent.
I wouldnt expect them to be added, but judging by the ammount of complaints on here, I think Beth' will have to do something.
But alas, as stated earlier, It would be mighty difficult to add them, unless they just went "hey heres some Werebears" and run off.

I'd rather have more content and weapons and armor and new land to explore. Maybe some new factions to join. Who [censored] cares about werebears.

Werebears? Probably not.

They could add it just like they added the werewolf perk tree. You can only see the tree in beast mode, and it doesn't require normal perk points. So it just be like something different like vampire lord, were you could only see it in bear form.

With that being said, I highly, highly, HIGHLY doubt we ever get werebears. Anyway, I think they should focus on something different we already have werewolfs

Just so you know, they can always patch in dialogue changes and in both vanilla skyrim and any expansions. None of this would be a problem but they would probably be too lazy to do it for anything beyond the checks already in the game to see if you're a werewofl because it affects a plot decision/option.

I care about a company adhering to the rules of its mythology. If we go to Black Marsh in the next Elder Scrolls game, I expect Argonians. I expect a variety of poisonous creatures. I expect unique vampires we've yet to encounter.

It isn't so much about werebears themselves, but developers ignoring their previously established lore in favor of taking the easy way out.

This very much so. Instead of werebears which are supposed to be common in Skyrim, we get dragons that last time I checked were never mentioned to be in Skyrim before the this game came out. It is very annoying.

I didn't mind the dragons so much, and I by no means feel that Bethesda can't do new things with their games, but they should remember previously established lore and follow it.

I'm actually hoping dragons stick around in future games. I don't want them to get axed the same way the Shadowscales did from Oblivion for no adequately explained reason.

I doubt we'll see them now but I really don't care. Although more choice is always good this would be purely cosmetic and a waste, IMO. One type of were-creature is enough.

Developers are limited in what they can get into a DLC, especially with publisher's deadlines and fans making all the "OMG where iz my DLC!?!?" threads we saw prior to Dawnguard's announcement. Not everything can make it into the game.

I think they should leave dragons with Skyrim because they were only returning in Skyrim. And once Alduin is killed they cannot be revived, and I don't think very many dragons came back to life.

But I was mad that they axed the Shadowscales too. I am still keeping my hopes up for werebears.

I don't believe patching DLCs is that simple.
For example, Steam automatically updates the game. How are they supposed to release a patch for Dawnguard that automatically applies itself if only half the public actually has Dawnguard?


The dialog both says "werewolf" and I believe it could pose a problem even simply if the werebear disease has a different base ID, depending on how they programmed it.
Again, when I say "problem," it's not so much that it's NOT doable, but the only way to implement werebears at this point would be by making all the restrictions they've set upon werewolves at this point COMPLETELY trivial. It would seem odd to make sure you can't be both a werewolf and a vampire, then to allow a werebear vampire lord without batting an eye, thus I doubt they do it.

Not to mention patches cost money.

We did get Shivering Isles and non-SI versions of patches for Oblivion, but I think when you do it for more than one DLC you start to have problems.

Also, Bloodmoon and Tribunal recognised each other.

Wolves>Bears

Once upon a time though, in TES II: Daggerfall, we had two types of Lycanthropes. Werewolves, and Wereboars. Werewolves were faster and more agile, Wereboars were tougher.

I wish that you could get Lych not only from these Companions , bah.

Well they did the same thing with the Volkihar vampires as well...

You know that's not really a point in their favor, right?

I am aware it's a big screw up, but if anything it just shows that they will do nothing about it.

On another note, Werelions were supposed to be an issue in Cyrodill...

You're right... I never played Oblivion, but I had figured Werelions would be native to Elsweyr considering Khajiit and all. Just looked it up and they're there too, and Black Marsh as well, along with Werecrocodiles. I don't look forward to not playing as them in future games, but at least now I can prepare for the disappointment.