That has nothing to do with the word "iconic".

Comparing IPs, no and never will be. But as console brand in this day, yes. But this is something that can easily be archieved with marketing and easily lost as well. No one will probably care about PS after the Vita failed and Steam crushes every home console.

Sales don't equal iconic. Pacman is still one of the most iconic video game characters of all time, the games haven't been popular in years. When most people think of Donkey Kong, it's still of him throwing barrels at Mario. Non-gamers are largely unaware of things like Animal Crossing or even SSB.

Well those IPs are part of Nintendo's is iconic. I mean you hear Nintendo you think Mario, Zelda, etc.

Playstation is iconic like Atari, its a machine a lot of people played their games on. But the average consumer doesn't think of Sony IP when they hear Playstation.

Bottom line, their impact on the industry is just different. The way Nintendo and Playstation are perceived by consumers is also different.

A franchise can very much be a brand. The word brand means "to burn" in my language (i.e. to burn your mark on a product). Pokémon is a brand, but so is Mario and Animal Crossing. You can buy all kinds of products with the "marks" of these franchises on.

As a console brand Playstation is obviously stronger, but why would that surprise anyone? Nintendo has never used the same name for too long with their consoles, it keeps changing. NES, SNES, Gameboy, DS, Wii, etc.

I think you're much more likely to sell clothes, toys, tv shows and collectables with the Nintendo brand than with the Playstation brand. And that's because the Nintendo brand is so much more than simply hardware. The Playstation brand on the other hand will sell you more consoles than the Nintendo brand. Each brand has their strenghts and weaknesses.

It's kind of silly comparing the Playstation brand with the Nintendo brand and then say we can only talk about consoles. That would only make sense if Nintendo called all their consoles NES 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc.

So basically OP is comparing two very different things.

I just wish for once people on this site would look at a subject like this objectively instead of being hardcore fanboys about it. And that goes for both sides...

For Casuals or maybe gamers too:
When people mention "PlayStation" they would mostly think about the Hardware
But when people mentions "Nintendo" they say both the hardware (Wii and DS) and Software (Mario universe characters, Zelda, Wii Sports and Pokemon)

Sooooo I would still say Nintendo is much more Iconic than Playstation in terms of the casuals. Because causals dont care about the sales and all of those specs which Playstation clearly tops it.

Many of the users like you seem to think we're comparing mascots when it's about the brands themselves. Playstation has become the symbol/icon of gaming a while ago.  How revelent a brand is in the market matters because it's about which brand is more iconic. 

In order for something to remain the symbol of an entire industry, it has to remain popular or revelent otherwise it becomes just the icon of days long since passed.  Everyone knows of nintendo and it's mascots but not many gamers actually want to experience it's games. it's no different than the music that old people listen to. It is completely out of touch with gaming of today and has become less iconic than playstation. 

Icon, a person or thing regarded as a representative symbol of something.

Playstation is more iconic (as in widely recognized) than Nintendo, but Nintendo franchises are more iconic than both Playstation and Nintendo combined. People know Mario, but they don't really know who the hell made it...

Also, when talking about sales, hasn't Nintendo crushed every generation when it comes to console sales(handheld+ home)? They even lead this one with a healthy 30mn margin.