Actually, Sony's IPs usually release at a higher rate than Nintendo's IPs did back then when they were created. Yes, there are many Mario games nowadays, but that's because the Mario IP has branched off into several successful spinoff series. If you look at these spinoff series individually, you'll notice that there are usually several years between releases. This means that legacy isn't built through high frequency of releases, but rather reasonably spaced out releases.

Basically, the only Sony IP that followed this path is Gran Turismo which just so happens to be their most successful one. Pretty much everything else got worn out, because Sony released too many games close to each other. This is also the main reason why Sony comes up with more new big budget IPs than Nintendo, because they don't have much of a choice. Once a series has declined to the point that it won't move two million copies anymore, you might as well start over with something new.

Zelda may have had 14 games over 27 years, but from 2001 to 2013; there's been 9 zelda games (not counting the remakes or re-releases) - with 2 more being announced for the near future.

Looking at how many Mario games there were for the same time period is too many to count ). The number of Mario games still outnumber the number those of every exclusive IP on the playstation combined during the same time period- that's not even counting the 15+ year headstart.

I always assumed nintendo characters remained relevant because: coming out with the same game and characters over many generations creates mindshare- thus making those characters more recognizable and keeping the games relevant. The main reason Crash Bandicoot and Jak and Daxter and Sly Cooper became irrelevant was because those developers went on to make new ip's rather than rehashing old ones. It had nothing to do with the actual quality of the games- because there are plenty of mario games that fall well below 90 on metacritic. And how many of nintendo's current games are new ip's?

And 2:  They aim towards a younger audience that is constantly being replaced. There's always going to be an audience for Mario and the like because there's always gonna be kids buying and growing up with the brand and when those kids are older they'll still be playing it, because they grew up on the game.

It's the same tactic call of duty and pokemon use: make a new game every year and every year it'll grow because there are new people constantly being introduced to it and in addition, there's always going to be the large fanbase that will buy it anyways.

Also ratchet and clank have been going downhill because sony don't promote the games like they should. They're still great games. And if I'm not wrong: every Halo game does better than the previous.

I was thinking along the lines of consoles so I forgot about animal crossing and pokemon. But zelda and donkey kong is not a stronger example.

Flawed argument, firstly lets start with Zelda, those 9 Zelda games are across 4 different platforms, N64, GC, Wii and DS, the next one is on a 5th platform the 3DS while the one after that is on a 6th (Wii U) and won't be arriving for a few years. Essentially that release rate of the series per platform is far less then other franchise averaging at two per platform.

Mario is far from a rehash like you claim I suggest you look up the meaning of rehash before throwing it around, Mario 64, Sunhine, Galaxy, 3d Land are nothing like each other, the concept and approach differs significantly and if you want to bring in other games in the franchise, the rpg games Paper, M&L and such are nothing like each other either. Even the 2d games differ from each other you like a number of people don't seem to understand the concept of a franchise when you see Mario's name Rol explained it earlier, the fact that his name can be place on a number of different genres and generate sales highlights the legacy of Nintendo in handling their library. Seeing as you asked in the last decade across Nintendo has had over 10 new ips including Xenoblade, Pandora, TLS, Soma Bringer, Takt, Dillon, Wii series being recent ones.

Nintendo aims at a broad market not just younger people a lot of Mario's fans are grown men and women by your logic there Crash, R&C and so on should of had much more success and people buy COD and Pokemon because they're consistently good not because of the release, look up Activisions frequent release of the Guitar Hero franchises and so on to see how that ended up it completely goes against your logic here. Every Halo doesn't do better then the previous btw.