The latter is necessary for the former to be true.

Legend of Zelda's never had 3 new sequels on one piece of hardware before.  Super Mario did on NES only, Donkey Kong did on NES (sort of, they were arcade ports), SNES and GB.  And the Nintendo of today seems to space things out more... even a direct sequel like Mario Galaxy 2 came almost 3 years later and was considered something an "exception" for the company.  Most Nintendo series tend to get 1-2 original installments per hardware now though, even the biggest ones.

In any case, it just seems like logical fallacy to praise Sony for introducing new IPs when they simultaneously iterate and sequelize on them so frequently.  It's actually been like this for Naughty Dog and Insomniac every gen since PS1, they bring out a new IP and do 2-3 direct sequels on the same hardware.  3 sequels in 5 years on the same hardware does seem excessive imo, if Nintendo were doing the same they'd be crucified for it (as they were when they did it for Mario Party in previous generations).   No it's not as bad as the annualized practices of Activision, Ubisoft or EA, but it still comes off as milking imo.

Nintendo iterates far, far less than Sony.  Hell, for something minor (that you'd normally expect to reuse code) like Mario's jumping physics, they redo everything from scratch for every new 2D entry (bar SMB2 JP way back in 1986).  Nintendo may use their established brands to the fullest, definitely, but there's really much less actual recycling going on at NCL than there is within SCE.

Out of the first parties, Sony definitely seems the milkiest.  Nobody else is pumping out continual bi-annual sequels of their biggest games, except on occasion Microsoft (Forza, Gears).  And nobody else has fallen into the annual sports trap.  Sony does bring out a lot of new IP, which is commendable, but I don't think their development practices really nurture IP as well as Nintendo.  And I'd say the sales somewhat reflect that.

Yes, lots of good games is the best standard.  And I'd agree both Nintendo and Sony more than deliver on that front.  Microsoft isn't too shabby in that regard either.

My issue is there seems to be that there's this disconnect when it comes to praise... on one hand, Sony gets tons of mileage around here out of delivering new IP, yet on the other hand they tend to iterate the fuck out of that new IP.  I mean that's fine, but it just seems to me there a bit of a double standard at play in terms of praising originality.  It's just a different approach, I guess... Nintendo tends to reuse an established series or brand, but they almost always go 100% ground up in terms of design or assets for their major sequels.  Sony this gen has seemed to throw out a lot of original titles, but if they catch on they also seem to quickly pump out sequels that build on the formula rather than reinvent it.  Obviously there are exceptions on both sides (Pokemon is very much an iterative major series for Nintendo, while Team ICO seems to have a very "ground up" approach to each of their games), but there seem to be different approaches generally for each company, and I'd say it's very much open to debate which one actually brings more in terms of originality or innovation.

The thing about Sony is they do both, they encourage creativity and innovation while still providing people with more of their favorites which have differences but not as significant and usually always just improving on what was already there, Sony does milk series a little but not to death and again they do improve on them (most of them anyways rachet and clank seems to be stuck at the same level) where Nintendo usually just innovates within their brand names which is kind of an odd strategy but it works for them because they always make their games work a less dev would have screwed it up and made a game have game breaking flaws (square enix for example) as for MS they really don't have the manpower to do much, and they seem to milk what they do have and their games don't improve or change like Nintendos and Sony's do 

Their lopsided support of PS3 over PSP (and apparently over NGP, if the studio assigned to the NGP Killzone is any indication) is worthy of further discussion when assessing Sony's strengths and weaknesses as a publisher. They have done a good job of conceiving moderately (in sales terms) successful new IPs.

I agree. I also disagree when people only take into account the "main mario titles." If you look at the amount of Mario branded titles released over the wii's life, he is clearly milked, but his games are often high quality so it is pretty hard to complain lol.

During the PS1, and PS2 era Sony had 3rd parties keeping them on top. Now that they don't they are working more on 1st party games. The problem is those games have no impact on the industry or hardware when it comes to sales. Games like LBP, and Infamous, and Uncharted. May be great for the industry when it comes to new creative ips. Still the month to month industry growth numbers. Little to no impact at least this generation. The more these huge new games fail to make them real money. The sooner they will dissappear or get passed to someone else. Remember Sypro, and Crash. Those guys where new, but not really big time. Now they float from developer to developer. If Sony new games had as much of a impact as Wii series games, or even something like Mario games. Then you would have a point.  Your point of view is really only about being a fan or gamer. Still I bet at one time people who loved Neo Geo, and Dreamcast. Thought the same thing about the new games they were making.

Also Sony games that have had or will have 2 to 3 this generation are.

Ratchet and Clank, Infamous, Uncharted, Motorstorm, Killzone, LBP, and Resistance! Since Ratchet and Clank was created there has been more of those games. Then 3d and 2d Mario games combined. Where Nintendo has made Wii Fit that has out sold them all combined. The moral is there are those that need many, and those we need a few!

Milking a character is alot different than milking a franchise. Mario is in alot of different games. Were Ratchet is in alot of games. 5 different experiences featuring Mario is better than 3 sequels of Ratchet and Clank!

You can't be the best publisher when you are so bad at marketing. Nintendo is the best.

To the people (Jarrod) complaining that Sony iterates too much compared to Nintendo - didn't SMG3 get announced like two weeks ago?