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 ? You're all making some hypothesis that in the future Sony would sell less if it had more consoles or that Nintendo will top it to make Nintendo look better. It's stupid

Nintendo have ''been going downhill'' for most of their history as a videogame company. SNES sold less than NES, N64 sold less than SNES, GameCube sold less than N64 and GBA sold less than original Gameboy. So that's almost 20 years of ''going downhill', compared to Sony's downhill of about 6 years. It's only with Wii and DS that Nintendo picked up sales (except that PS3 will outsell PSP and Wii won't outsell DS). So this whole 'downhill' thing really doesn't matter much.

The real magic number will come when we compare number of Nintendo developed games sold against any other developer's.

That will make them look really good.

Congrats to Nintendo and my childhood haha

If we take away bundles with hardware and accessories and pokemon games, it's not that magical

Flawed argument but, even then, it would still be.

Especially if you take away the same things from the other devs - especially their biggest franchises.

.. lol okay okay we get it.. Nintendo sucks no matter what they achieve! .. coz sony is better! /end

=)

if by this gen you mean Wii+DS, not a chance. But, worry not, as WiiU and 3DS should do that quite easily.

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.

Actually, that wasn't my point at all. But you being in such a defensive state shows your true colours, to be honest

Except that the ONLY thing that I did and pointed out at, thus rendering the rest of your post completely moot. And 5th generation, was, as far as I remember N64, Saturn and Ps1, so i don't know what you're getting at there. And what i did was adding all PS sales together then divide them by number of consoles to get an average of about 80-85M and i did the same thing with Nintendo. My original point was that Sony managed to sell more than half of Nintendo 's sales while having almost 3x less consoles, and i used the math above to back it up.