Six years after its release, is Catherine a sexist nightmare or feminist parable?

2011's platform puzzler deserves a second look for tackling challenging themes that most games daren't tackle.

[bluefox755]

No.

[Yui_Suzumiya]

I absolutely loved this game!

[Zjet]

Its a game.... a piece of entertainment. Don't go and transform it.

[EmperorDalek]

It's a masterpiece... there's no need for your political garbage.

[Omnisonne]

Yeah, first sentence goes: ''If video games were a physical realm, it would be a hostile and potentially lethal place for women.'' Should tell you all you need to know about the rest of the article.
I'm still amazed how in so many games you mow down hundreds of male characters like they were blades of grass, and it gets conveniently overlooked or ignored every single time.

I really wish people would stop submitting this feminist horseshit.

[Blu3_Berry]

I loved this game, sadly I don't have my PS3 anymore. Would love to see this release on PC at some point but it probably has a rather low chance of it actually happening.

[Summons75]

They should just remaster it for PS4

[babadivad]

It's BC on X1. I just beat this game about 2 weeks ago. It was FANTASTIC. Didn't know what I was missing.

[Omnislashver36]

What's the need with all of this Feminist/Anti-Feminist garbage? Also, deff clickbait.

[Cryptcuzz]

I'll never click and read an article that brings feminists/anti-feminists into videogames.
I came here just to see (hoping) others go ape shit on website / author.

[Omnislashver36]

Geez, it's not like we've got articles saying:

"Gears of War- Sexist nightmare or Patriarchal savior?"

Nonsense article.

[gamer7804]

OORRR, maybe its just a game with a unique story... gotta love leading questions. objection! judge i say!

[GrimDragon]

Whether it is or isn't doesn't matter. It's a game, it's fantasy. Only insecure idiots push This nonsense out to the masses in hopes of recruiting the misinformed, and maladjusted. Just play the dam game and enjoy. Or if it somehow offends your brittle feelings don't play it.

[Fist4achin]

It's a story.

So what are there never meant to be portrayals in whatever form of media of slavery, abuse, rape, murder because they are wrong?! If it offends you, don't watch, play, or read it!

[Cryptcuzz]

Really gamesradar?
I use to go there a lot back in the days.
Now I'll make sure to not pay them a visit ever again.

Anyone who brings this political crap into video games, whether for click bait or otherwise, deserves a block.

[chrisgay]

Yeah it sounds like this content isn't really for you.

I think there's plenty of room in the world of games journalism for in-depth analyses of games that look at how those games handle a whole bunch of issues.

It's unfortunate that the people who really ought to be reading this sort of stuff just immediately write it off.

If we want video games to be taken seriously as an art form, we have to have these conversations. Should politics and social issues also be left out of novels? Movies? Music?

And you know what? These conversations are actually super interesting and fun to engage with when you approach them with an open mind. It's certainly a lot more interesting than just talking about "graphics" or "gameplay".

Video games and the discourse around them are growing up. I recommend you do too.

[Omnisonne]

You're sounding almost as patronizing as that article.. Nobody likes it when stuff gets forced down their throats, gaming is about relaxation and recreation, not discussing politics and social issues, most people get enough of that in their daily lives.
There are other platforms and websites you can discuss these topics as extensively as you like.

[Adrian_v01]

I'm fine with these articles, not because I agree with them, bit because I see games as a form of art. And throughout history new approaches to every genre of art have been criticized, even those that we consider masterpieces nowadays. On one side gamers want games to be seen as crative pieces of artwork, on the other they don't want discussions to form about them. One doesn't come without the other.

[rainslacker]

In depth analysis of the game?

This article is doing that?

I don't think so.

Catherine was more about Vincent and his own dissent caused by his guilt or lack there of of the choices he made.

The two Catherine's in the game were just a basis to give context to that. It wasn't made to sexualize women, demean them, or make them look bad. The two Catherine's in the game were two different types of women who were most definately meant to be opposite ends of a spectrum.

The women in this game are more a framing device of the story around Vincent than a representation of any sort of feminine ideal of any type.

So, yeah, I'd say the content of this article is definitely not for me, because it isn't a good analysis of the game, because it ignores the actual point of the story of the game, which is vincent, not women or their issues. Just because something tries to twist something into a political view does not make it an in depth analysis. This analysis is about as shallow as your comment as a whole is, and is more pretentious than your comment is.

In my comment, in the span of a few short paragraphs I managed to go into a much more in depth analysis, and didn't even bother to really delve into the psychological or social issues that were represented in the game and a more prevelant part of the story than the sexism or parables that this article brings up, thus rendering the reason to read this article meaningless, and those writing it off completely justified to ignore it.

[chrisgay]

Just because a game wasn't made to do something, doesn't mean that it doesn't have that effect on a player. People are free to interpret media how they see fit. Things aren't being "twisted" into political views - these are real people interpreting games. You may disagree with the interpretation but they're not wrong for interpreting it as such.

I haven't actually played Catherine, but reading the article and reading your response was interesting. That's actually what I was calling for - for people to engage with these discussions rather than immediately writing them off. Though, I'm concerned about your hasty dismissal of two female main characters, after whom the game is titled as simply "framing devices for the male character's story". I found the original article to be more convincing in its arguments personally.

To the person who thinks that this content is being forced down their throat - I ask, seriously? Don't read it. I enjoy reading and having these discussions around video games - who are you to say that's wrong? Nobody is trying to stop you from enjoying games as relaxation and recreation. I'm not in the comment threads of content I find boring, telling the authors to stop forcing that content down my throat.

[Protagonist]

Did not even know there was a supposed controversy about this game. All I know is that I loved it, thought the story was great, puzzles was hard (for me at least) and now thinking about playing it again.

[rainslacker]

Game is great. Very underrated and went mostly unnoticed. Definately can be defined as a cult classic.

The controversy is more when you look at it in a post-SJW world, where everything throughout history is looked at through new lenses.

The only controversy this game got at the time of it's release was some grumbling that it was sexist, mostly due to the cover art, and some people who just thought it was a cheating simulator without realizing that it's story was much more involved than that.

[Protagonist]

I've had my share of debates/arguments against racists, homophobes and other bigots on this site, calling me a SJW and so forth, but that is an alt-right term. When I see bigotry and injustice I respond. But this game is neither sexist or bigoted but on the contrary rather an adult themed game story-wise (much needed in the gaming industry) about relationship and coming off of having been a free spirit, but now got to change that mindset, creatively told through the imagined and genius gameplay crafted by Atlus and the Persona team.

[rainslacker]

The idea of being active against injustice or social issues in and of itself isn't a bad thing. I think many people are to some degree. I'm probably more than I used to be, because my wife is a lawyer specializing in women's rights, so I'm exposed to it a lot more than I'd be otherwise.

But there are extremist nowadays who tainted the idea of being active to be some pervasive ideological cult which can't accept any discourse which falters from it's world view, and it's caused problems among those who try to do things the more equitable way and try to make positive change, because our culture is being more defensive due to being told they're constantly wrong with no intention of discourse over the issue at hand.

This is a rather broad generalization, and of course any anecdotal evidence can be used to ignore it, but the facts are that the media itself perpetuates this in society, because it gives way too much time to those who don't really deserve to have a soapbox relayed to the masses because they don't take the time to understand the issue, and are more worried about having a solution instead of focusing on the actual problem to come to a reasonable outcome.

I have nothing against those who are active at all. I even encourage it in a rather passive manner. I just have a problem with those who decide that anyone else's opinion is unfounded and that those other people's opinions aren't worth discussing, all while taking the moral high ground and looking down on those who believe in a middle ground, and more so those who ignore those who actually want discourse so they can just be "outraged" about something.

[Protagonist]

The old Greek philosopher Aristotle explained virtue as part of ethics and within virtue is courage, meaning (according to Aristotle): when one sees injustice one must act (at the right moment) and by doing so one possess true ethics.

While philosophy indeed can be abstract surely this is not an abstract construct, but merely a simple manifestation by responding to injustice and bigotry. A racist, misogynist and a bigot will never talk about fairness; just and right, but rather the ego and his rights to act how he please. It will never be about positive change. Yes this is solely based on personal observation in real life and the internet.

But now I honestly ask: when has the alt-right or any opposition on the far right had systematic scientific evaluation besides pseudoscience, which has led to racism, misogyny, genocide and other to crimes against humanity.

Yes ethics, virtue, courage is literally a moral high ground and the very same people you talk about being looked down upon are the ones ridiculing when I try to explain eg. by philosophy, why their thinking and action is not a desirable trade. This is the middle ground, but will they listen...

[rainslacker]

I don't believe that it's a left or right issue, as social matters affect everyone, and overall, the only difference between the two is in how they need to be addressed or handled(or solved if need be).

But it's the middle ground that gets ignored, along with all those who try to work within that ground to actually effect change, as they get almost no notice in the media, and are ridiculed or ignored by either of the extremist sides who only see things in black and white.

While it's not right to completely dismiss any notion that may come from either side of the extreme spectrum, it needs to be possible to have a discourse with those sides to get both sides to come to a common consensus.

It's easy enough to point at the anecdotal comments or discussion that cause one extreme side to say that an entire community or group of people is irrational because they all think that way, but in those cases, the extremist with to remain as ignorant as possible, and rely on hyperbole....or psuedo-science as you put it....or worse, their own feelings which go beyond ignoring people, but ignoring the larger social issues and cultural norms which lead to said injustices in the first place. To use an analogy, people on the extreme sides tend to look at the symptom instead of the disease, and until the disease is remedied, or at least treated, the symptom isn't likely to go away.

In all things involving most social issues, you can't undo decades or centuries of culture or society by bickering over it. You can't beat people into submission, because all that does is cause people to give up if they're on an opposing side, until one day, it just comes back even stronger. This is one reason why I think Trump did so well, because the more normal people who are tired of all the extremism, as well as the extremist who got beaten into submission over the past decade, finally had someone speaking for them, or at least not ignoring them.

The middle ground is where stuff gets solved though. It doesn't happen overnight, even with regulation or laws. People would do well to understand that society and culture was fostered over decades or centuries, or even millenia, and that any changes to it happen over the same amount of time. Women and African American rights and equality for instance took half a century before it got to where it is, and it's still not solved completely. Gay rights are happening much faster, but in an societal outlook level there is only marginal change in how people feel about such things. But it's good that such changes can happen quicker due to social media, but it's not the extremist postulating on their soap boxes doing it, it's the activist who go the proper channels to actually gradually change outlooks, as the extremists are mostly ignored except when it comes to PR disasters, and I believe most of those people care more about their ego than they do about any given issue.

[KwokXi]

This game was, well, is great. I think I might buy it on PSN and play it again, it's been too long :

The sheep people are the best! This article and the teddy you get of the sheep man in Persona 5 have made me want to play this again ♡

[GamesMaster1982]

I thought it was a pile of crap. I mean it barley had any gameplay reminds me of Persona 5 actually. i mean i guess the people who like games like this think that walking sims are pieces of art as well.

[MilkMan]

It's a puzzle game. That's all. NEXT!

[Matrix6]

Catherine: +1
Article: -999

[TheColbertinator]

If you think for any moment Catherine was made to cater to the lowest common denominator,you'd be wrong.

Its a unique and challenging game ,meant for those gamers who crave something good yet totally different.

[TheOttomatic91]

Ah 2011 back when the SJW menace didn't exist sight good times good times.

[NecoTehSergal]

Get this degeneracy out of here, it's just simply a good game with a different take on a story.

That and I loved CryPlays' playthrough of it.

[Cartman55125]

It's a game.

[47]

How about neither? It doesn't have to be one or the other.