More importantly, both DS and PS2 were phenomenal systems with diverse, impressive catalogues of software. Why we can't celebrate that, instead of enduring another tribalistic, fanboy-centric circle jerk thread about PS2 versus DS? Or are the numbers more important than the experiences each system provided? Such a shame that fans of both sides of this argument haven't bothered to celebrate that, but instead opted for these kinds of silly little threads.

After so many 'DS will sell more than PS2 with ease'  threads you come wait to late with this post.  Just accept that you lost =p.

Get your facts right before you post.

DS production hasn't yet stopped, Nintendo have merely stopped forecasting sales for the device. If you judge production of a device by that yardstick, then bad news--Sony have now stopped forecasting PS2 sales, and have only forecast expected PS3 sales for the coming year. Obviously the PS2 has stopped being produced, no?

OR, think a little more clearly, and realise that both systems are now in the same place. Sales are low enough, and other systems are more of a priority at both firms, that PS2 and DS no longer need to be forecast. The information is no longer particularly relevant to investors, shareholders and analysts.

It should also come as no surprise to anyone that PS2 remains the top selling system of all time. Sony are a huge consumer electronics firm that sell in a far wider variety of markets than Nintendo do, which means Sony have a more widespread, superior distribution network through which they sold PS2 after sales in major videogaming markets had become a non-entity. The fact DS came so close to PS2 without that kind of distribution apparatus is immensely impressive. DS never had as large an audience to appeal to as PS2, because it was never sold to as many markets.

More importantly, both DS and PS2 were phenomenal systems with diverse, impressive catalogues of software. Why we can't celebrate that, instead of enduring another tribalistic, fanboy-centric circle jerk thread about PS2 versus DS? Or are the numbers more important than the experiences each system provided? Such a shame that fans of both sides of this argument haven't bothered to celebrate that, but instead opted for these kinds of silly little threads.

Did you actually read the OP and the thread? I recognise that both companies did extremely well with both systems. Also in light of being corrected earlier I conceded the point about production so that entire section of your post wasn't even necessary.

And this isn't a shareholder meeting but a sales forum and we discuss sales from time to time. It's obvious that both systems are irrelivant at this stage but it can be interesting to discuss the sales of older systems especially within the context of the discussion of all time sales.

Your points about Sony selling their HW in more markets is true but at the end of the day the only thing we have which is 100% concrete are the final sales numbers which we can then compare. I feel like you are overreacting a bit. If I say for example that Federer has the most grand slams it doesn't take anything away from Sampras so there should be no reason why we can't discuss sales as long as we remain respectful.

On April 1, 2007, Sony changed their reporting policy from units manufactured to the industry standard of units sold.

Of course, sold is to retailers, distributors and wholesalers...not consumers.

So the PS2 count seven years of that method?