Playstation Console Comparison

[Rydrum2112]

Someone posted in the nintendo sub-thread a link that showed how many console's nintendo has sold over the years, (here it is).

This little graph belongs in Huff's classic book, how to lie with statistics.

This is a classic example of selectivity in what they choose to graph, why aren't ps1 or ps2 represented- because it would blow away the nintendo numbers that is why.

I have used the updated numbers from wiki for the wii & ps3:

nes: 67.45
snes: 49.1
n64: 32.93
gcube: 22
wii: 75.9
Nintendo has sold 247.38 million consoles.

ps1: 102
ps2: 147.6
ps3: 41.6
Playstation has sold 291.2 million consoles sold, in less 2 generations

So PS has really outperformed Nintendo, & in a much smaller window of time.

 

[Squid]

uhm the reason it didn't show the other consoles is because it was about Nintendo's achievements... NOT the other consoles... so I don't get why you brought that up tbh.

Are you a Sony fanboy?

 

[Jquestionmark]

Even this isn't complete (and I'm not going to lie, I'm too lazy to look up what I'm about to mention), as it completely ignores two important things regarding the success of the companies in comparison:

1. Handheld consoles. Not traditional at home consoles, but game consoles all the same.

2. The profit/loss per unit sold. At launch, Sony was hemorrhaging money selling PS3s, while Nintendo was pulling a profit on every Wii sold. Kind of puts things in a different perspective for the most recent generation, at least.

There's always more to the picture. All statistics are lies in one way or another. It's always all in the presentation and selection.

 

[Demon]

I think Playstation might have Nintendo beat on numbers, but it has simply had good luck and a decent platform. Nintendo tends to do the more impressive, but their market appeal overall doesn't seem as... I don't want to say wide, but yeah, something like that.

 

[blakstang98]

Well, one of my major reasons for buying a PS1 back in the day was because it came out near the end of the Nintendo vs. Sega war. At the time, Nintendo and Sega were separate companies and ran almost completely exclusive games for each system, with the exception of big name games. Sony brought out the PS1 and sort of acted as the neutral system that, oddly enough, had a good amount of games from both sides of the fence. So I felt like it was a win-win to go that way. That basically led to Sega's demise, which led them to eventually be bought out by Nintendo. Now Mario and Sonic are on the same platform, how ironic.

uhm the reason it didn't show the other consoles is because it was about Nintendo's achievements... NOT the other consoles... so I don't get why you brought that up tbh.

Are you a Sony fanboy?

He just put up some raw numbers for comparison purposes. That doesn't make him a fanboy. More than anything, he's pointing out Sony's accomplishments when compared to Nintendo.

 

[Totoro]

I don't think profit should come into the argument about which company makes the more popular consoles. Just becuase the Wii is more cost efficient it doesn't make it a more popular console.

However I think the idea that handheld or portable consoles should be included. Because nearly everyone had a GameBoy when I was younger, or at least you knew a lot of people who had them.

Sony are a much younger gaming company though so they haven't had the time to get their handhelds out there compared to Nintendo.

 

[Rydrum2112]

Yeah I am no ps-fanboy, I have had both PS & Nintendo consoles and equally enjoyed both.

I just wanted to point out that the comparisons are incomplete when presented they way they were.

I didn't include handheld because that is a different market/product.
I am not sure profit really matters from a gamer perspective.

 

[Masked Man]

Comparing consoles is like comparing Final Fantasy games against eachother; it's fail. Each console is better/worse at something compared to another, but it has something/a charm that makes it worth owning.