Why do PS3 3rd party exclusives sell more than Wii 3rd party exclusives? - A Comparison

[Immortal]

pezus said:

Immortal said:
I'm sorry, but this seems like a horribly specific comparison tailored to make the PS3 look better. Saying third party exclusives and then allowing games that are on the 360 on there is just plain silly.
By the way, I'm probably missing something, but why isn't the first Mario and Sonic on there again? Did Nintendo publish it?

It's a valid comparison. People exclude the PC when doing 360 vs. PS3 comparisons so why don't we exclude 360 when we do PS3 vs. Wii comparisons?

Mario and Sonic are there. Two games in fact. 

No one justifies it this way, though. The justification for excluding PC is that it's not a console. Even then, you could argue that it's unfair since excluding PC multiplats only really benefits the 360. The same way, this only benefits the PS3 here (and greatly, at that).

Also, the fact that I'm far from the only one here who finds this comparison ridiculous speaks volumes, don't you think?

Oh, and I said the first Mario and Sonic; the one that sold 7.85m. After looking it up, I see that it was actually published by Nintendo and not Sega even though the DS version and subsequent games in the series were. That's just odd.