| Player1x3 said: Why are you all talking about something completely different when my point was simply that Sony AS OF NOW sells more on average than Nintendo per hardware ? |
The problem is that this too is a flawed assumption. It all depends on where you set the starting point.
If you only count the newest machine, (3DS vs Vita), it's of 21 million vs 3 million, in favour Nintendo.
If you make it the two newest machines, (3DS + Wii vs Vita + Ps3), it's 118.1 million vs 70.3 million.
If you make it the three newest machines, (3DS + Wii + DS vs Vita + Ps3 + PsP) it's 270.8 million vs 145.5 million
If you make it the four newest machines, (3DS + Wii + DS + Gamecube vs Vita + Ps3 + PsP + Ps2) it's 292.57 million vs 299.15 million, slightly in favour to Sony
If you make it the five newest machines, (3DS + Wii + DS + GC + GBA vs Vita + Ps3 + PsP + Ps2 + Ps1), it's 374.08 vs 403.25 million, in favour to Sony.
The only way you can look at it to get Sony averaging more sold per machine than Nintendo, is by including all of Sony's machines. The problem with this, however, is that you're essentially ignoring an entire generation worth of Nintendo machines (the 5th generation).
At best, you can say that Sony has managed to match Nintendo since they started, without having reached a clearly biased conclusion. You'd have a stance that's very defendable here.
Doing what you're doing, which is holding it against Nintendo that they've made both handehelds and consoles, doesn't really make sense. You're looking at the numbers from the least logical - and least fair - perspective, because that's the one that gives you the outcome you want.
That's what's causing negative reactions, because it's what fanboys usually do, and it's pretty annoying when people do it.
