Rumor: Catherine Remaster Is Being Worked On By Atlus

Catherine was made backwards compatible on Xbox One almost exactly one year ago, but now there are some rumors about a possible remaster of the game.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
307d ago Replies(2)
SegaGamer307d ago

Why ? it doesn't need one.

OmnislashVer36307d ago

Higher res alone will make it look way nicer. I'm interested in this.

Concertoine307d ago (Edited 307d ago )

Id be more interested in a sequel personally.

The problem with Catherine was the way the game judged you hardcore if you chose C catherine over your bitch girlfriend lol.

Like sure shes hot but im not staying with someone who lies about being pregnant.

_-EDMIX-_307d ago

I have no clue what you're talking about in terms of "need", no one needs to buy any games.

Its existence is because there's multiple Gamers who have yet to actually play the game, thus a business opportunity presents itself.

Not everybody owns a Playstation 3 or 360, thus a business opportunity presents itself.

I mean I own multiple systems and never really sell my game consoles but that doesn't actually mean I'm the norm of Gaming.

There is a great reason why remasters actually exist.

ChrisW307d ago

Why? Because when you grossly overhype something that is "okay..." at best, people who enjoyed it will obviously want more!

Jon_Targaryen307d ago

Because who needs BC, right?

mikeslemonade307d ago

Lol we don't need BC or this remasters. Only a few games deserves remasters.

CurbStompin306d ago

@mikeslemonade Your brain needs remastering.

mikeslemonade305d ago (Edited 305d ago )

Expand your horizons not just play old games.

The Wood307d ago (Edited 307d ago )

Can't disagree with that one. If on the other hand that remaster is free for those who still have the original I'd bend for that. . . . The likelihood of that happening is slim to none though. They're talking full advantage of us. .

My mischievous side says who needs newer games right?. . . I mean bc is about the old games which is good but new games can sometimes just be. . .You know. . .better. *cough persona 5*. .pick your poison. . . Perfect world is both. . .If I had to choose between the two, I'm going new experiences over old as I still own my last gen console that this game was gifted on via ps+

Sgt_Slaughter307d ago

It's not slim to none, it's a 100% no. No company is going to remake an entire game and give it out for free like that.

Why o why307d ago

I was trying to be nice...deep down I know its none:(

kevnb307d ago

These aren’t remakes at all.

kevnb307d ago

Sony purposely turned it off and invented the term “remaster”. Even ps3 slims could play ps2 games once modded.

_-EDMIX-_307d ago (Edited 307d ago )

Except the PlayStation 3 had PlayStation 1 ports even though the PlayStation 3 play PlayStation 1 games natively.

Sooooo no.

I want you to also consider that games like BioShock where we released on the Xbox , even though it actually has backwards compatibility is that because of Sony as well? Backwards compatibility is not going to make the game Run that much differently and is not going to magically add textures and features.

So how do you explain Square Enix putting games on the PlayStation Network store that were PlayStation 1 games especially considering the PlayStation 3 play PlayStation 1 games natively? Was that some sort of diabolical scheme by Sony as well?

So we're going to just completely disregard that Square Enix put games on PlayStation Network on a system that natively supports PlayStation 1 games?

OHHHH so that's incredibly crazy so what you're telling me is that someone could own a system that plays PlayStation 1 games but not owned every single last PlayStation 1 game in history? Derrrrrr that's crazy /s

Seriously you people cannot be this slow I find it really hard to believe anyone is this slow that they're not able to fully recognized this.

Publishers like Capcom Konami Square Enix or any of these companies don't care that you have the ability to play the game, they simply care or whether or not you purchased it in at the end of the day if you did not buy it last generation they're hoping the upgrades will allow you to buy it this generation.

That's it.

If you keep ignoring Publishers in regards to the need to sell software you're actually never going to fully understand this issue in fact the only way you really have this problem is if you basically purposely ignore that part 😎

I mean you're basically ignoring that remasters exist on Wii U switch Xbox One.... Are those all some sort of devious plan by Sony as well? Because I'm curious when Sony turned into Square Enix Konami Activision lol

kevnb307d ago (Edited 307d ago )

Oh look a wall of text that doesn’t make sense or respond to my comment properly. Well I suppose you do have a nice strawman since they never disabled ps1 games on ps3...

_-EDMIX-_307d ago (Edited 307d ago )

Please, you're just mad that your entire argument falls apart when you actually consider that PlayStation 3 play PlayStation 1 games and you still actually saw ports of PlayStation 1 games on PlayStation Network.

Backwards compatibility does not factor in Publishers wanting to rerelease games with different features.

That is why the Wii U was backwards compatible to the Wii yet still saw remasters

That is why the Wii was backwards compatible to the GameCube and still saw ports

That is why PlayStation 3 is natively backwards compatible to PlayStation one yet you still saw ports, that is why Xbox One is backwards compatible to 360 and you're still seeing remasters.

It's because the idea of being able to play the game does not actually change the damn fact that users may not own the damn game.

I'm sorry but you just don't fully understand this it's probably why you got mad and stormed off , no one's actually saying that backwards compatibility can't exist on PlayStation simply that it has very little to actually really do with the existence of remasters or ports.

I mean buddy you can't even answer why on Earth what's Sony care that Square Enix or Capcom is rereleasing something?

Why does Bioshock collection exist on the Xbox One? 😂😂😂

Are you seriously not understanding that backwards compatibility does not actually = consumer owning every single last game the previous generation?


Too much logic huh?

There is a GameCube version of the Ocarina of Time that exist... The Wii is backwards compatible..

Nintendo still released Ocarina of Time on the Wii.

I'm sorry but it doesn't take a damn rocket scientist to realize that backwards compatibility doesn't actually mean every user owns every game, they released it on the Wii because they know not every person actually owns the GameCube version of Ocarina of Time.

Sooooo I'm not sure why you're having a hard time realizing this it's probably why you're trying to avoid commenting 😂😂😂

I mean a game being ported to another system was not invented by Sony Computer Entertainment.

I mean dear God your logic doesn't even explain why other Publishers are actually doing it even on systems that are capable of playing those games so I guess you could throw that stupid Theory out the window, I guess Sony owns Nintendo and Microsoft now too 🐸☕

It's very clear to see simply saying "wall of text" just an easy way to cop out of an argument you know you are basically destroyed in.

I mean with that same logic it would be like saying the switch doesn't support 3 DS or Wii U games to sell remasters completely ignoring that even those systems with backwards compatibility still saw ports.

kevnb306d ago (Edited 306d ago )

where did I say that publishers cant sell old games on new consoles? I cant tell if you are really that dumb or just trolling, Im thinking you are just a huge troll. Sony obviously removed ps2 backwards compatibility on purpose, install custom firmware and it magically comes back even on slim ps3s... end of discussion. You also keep just talking about things nobody actual said, I'm guessing because you cant even read a sentence properly.

Imalwaysright306d ago


True. Sony went as far as uninstalling PS3 80 GB phat emulator through an update and later started charging for PS2 games on their store that were running on most likely an improved version of that same emulator. It's obvious that the PS4 doesn't have any kind of BC because they want to sell us games from previous generations wich leads me to believe that the PS5 will not be BC as well.

As for edmix aka venomsomethingsomethingx aka someone that should be banned comment, I only read the 1st sentence and he was already telling a half truth since PS3 later models didn't have the PS2 chip and couldn't run PS1 games natively. Later PS3 skus (slim/super slim) were running PS1 games through emulation just like they were running PS2 games bought from the PS store through emulation.

rainslacker306d ago (Edited 306d ago )

Remasters are just another name for cross gen ports most of the time. It's rare that more effort is put in to them than you'd see for the standard cross gen port.

In any case, the term remaster started last gen when BC was available. I guess Sony coined the term, but I don't think they purposefully turned off BC to sell them. They just don't have enough remasters to give up all that revenue they could make through having three generations of titles available on PSN to make nothing but profit off of without much effort. Sony charges publishers 20% of all revenue from games sold on PSN. You think that several thousands of titles available all the time somehow can be overshadowed by remasters that sell between 500K-1 million copies?

Please explain to me how Sony restricts thousands of available for games, ready to go from the start, is somehow less profitable than the 1-2 remasters that come out each year. Honestly, You'd make more sense if you said PSNow was the reason, because at least that could make some sense....although I feel even Sony wouldn't be that optimistic about how people would accept that as a BC solution, which is why they never marketed it as a BC solution.

Sony didn't include BC because they didn't have a solution like MS did to have publisher approval through emulation. They were trying to reach a price point, and BC was an obvious thing to remove....particularly the CELL chip which still cost about $60 each at the start of the gen. PS2 and PS1 could be included through hardware for around $7-10(projected), but that's still $7-10 of profit lost off each unit sold for what amounts to a feature which apparently doesn't make much difference to most customers.

I dunno what happened to you, but you used to be a lot more fair in your comments, and not so prone to hyperbole or false speculation.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 306d ago
_-EDMIX-_307d ago

Backwards compatibility is not going to alter features or make the game Run that much better compared to a full remaster.

kevnb307d ago (Edited 307d ago )

Go look up dolphin or pcsx2 and learn how much a higher render resolution can do. Also, you can learn what can happen to the frame rate of an emulated game when the original hardware couldn’t handle it. If you want to stick to console check out oblivion and halo 3 on Xbox one x.

_-EDMIX-_307d ago

Publishers are selling their games on emulators? Who?

No one saying they don't exist we're saying that businesses could care less they're simply trying to sell a product.

Because the last time I remember I did not know Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo put out their systems as emulators on PC officially...

Keep in mind that the argument is backwards compatibility in regards to what you would even see from Xbox One or PlayStation 4 or any system is not going to alter the game even the emulators you mentioned need absolutely powerful PCs just to do that are they still not struggling just to run PlayStation 3?

bluefox755307d ago

@kevnb Oblivion? You mean the 11 year old game that still runs at 30fps on the brand new, $500 console? A toaster will run that game at 60fps.

kevnb306d ago (Edited 306d ago )

@_-EDMIX-_ what are you even going on about? I respond to your comment and then you talk about people selling games on pc emulators? Not to mention we do see improvements in backwards compatible games on consoles, several of them are much better on xbox one or even on the 360 vs xbox.

kevnb306d ago (Edited 306d ago )

@bluefox755 does it matter if its an old game that runs on anything? Its a bc title that looks much better on a newer console and the upgrade was free... end of argument. Even the ps2 emulator sony built for the ps4 makes games look and run much better, but we cant use our old disks to access it because sony is too greedy. There is nothing wrong with selling old games or even advertising that they look and run better now, theres something wrong with forcing people to buy games again.

gangsta_red306d ago

Except a lot of BC games have already been proven to run better and a full remaster is no guarantee that any features will be altered.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 306d ago
bluefox755307d ago

I don't. I can just pop the game in my ps3 and play it. No clogging up my ps4 drive, or downloading a digital copy, just pop and play.

kevnb306d ago (Edited 306d ago )

Do you think your ps3 will last forever? Eventually it will crap out and you won’t be able to play the game without buying it again, the ps3 wasn’t built to last for decades.

rainslacker306d ago


My PS4 has lasted for over a decade now. It's still playing PS1-3 games without any problem, and it runs fine. If something craps out, it's likely the laser, which cost about $30 to replace. BC on PS4 would be nice, but knowing that it would drive up the cost of the system at launch, I can see why Sony took it out. I'd pay extra for it, but I know that most would not.

On that note, X1 isn't hardware BC. It's emulation. If MS pulls it's BC initiative for some reason, then it's gone. No BC. If publishers pull their approval then no BC for that game. As it stands, most games still aren't even available for BC. I give MS props for getting a workable solution, and leaving it up to devs, but it has nothing to do with remasters, and regardless, X1 still has remasters despite having BC for some of the games that are offered through BC.

Remasters are for those that want remasters, or new customers. It has nothing to do with BC. Stop trying to relate the two, or accusing one company of not allowing it for the purpose of selling new content. It makes no sense to give up all the store revenue that can be gained through BC, just to make sporadic money through remasters. The publishers themselves can even benefit much more, because they don't have to do remasters as much to try and get more money. You're trying to connect two disparate things, all while assuming that your conclusion is correct while not considering or even thinking of other possibilities.

It's not like you to be so overly negative towards either company, or resort to such speculative hyperbole.

CurbStompin306d ago (Edited 306d ago )

Cant tell where you are going with that statement.

gangsta_red306d ago

As much as I enjoyed this game I would not purchase it again just for a simple res bump. Especially since Catherine is already available through Xbox One BC.

Now if they added more puzzles, an extra side story or anything else then I would definitely consider this.

rainslacker306d ago

Yeah. Catherine. The game sold approximately 1 million copies. Obviously, everyone owns the game and BC is relevant to them for this game.

A remaster can give more attention to the game, and while there are likely people who will rebuy it, but for what amounts to minimal effort, the publisher can make some more money off it. BC would be great for those that have it, but BC and remasters are completely different products.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 305d ago
Blu3_Berry307d ago

Oh man I really hope its true. Catherine was one of the very few hidden gems that was an amazing game.

307d ago
Lynx0207307d ago

It would be great. I sold my PS3 some years ago and I would love to play Catherine again on PC or PS4.

_-EDMIX-_307d ago

Ironically that game was one of the many that made me never sell my PlayStation 3.

Great game

Show all comments (67)
The story is too old to be commented.