By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Is PlayStation Just As Iconic As Nintendo?

If we're talking iconic as in Mario - then Mario, no doubt, no mater how much people actually like to play those games or not.

If we're talking PlayStation and Nintendo - PS, a long, long time ago.



Around the Network

At one point, Mario was more recognized than Mickey mouse. My mom still calls every console "Nintendo" and my job has a "No Gameboy" policy ( which I circumvented by bringing a PSP instead. Suckers!).

I just don't hear video gaming called "PlayStation" any more than I hear Nancy Grace of some pundit call it "Nintendo" or "Xbox". Even the president called gaming " Xbox ". Of course I live in North America, though.



Wright said:

No way. You see people all the time asking for Nintento to go third party, but rarely hear about wanting for Sony to go bankrupt and selling their games to other companies. Why? Because they know who's the real icon here.

Huh. Never thought of it that way.



If we're talking about home console only of course PS is win. But if we're counting handheld too Nintendo is winning since like 25 years ago ( I'm not counting mobile because obviously they aren't console).

Edit: What I want to say is everything has its place.



A handheld gamer only (for now).

Was this article written a year after PS1 released? Oh wait never mind :^)



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
No, it isn't. The association between PlayStation and PlayStation-exclusive content isn't anywhere close to the association between Nintendo and Nintendo-exclusive content. When the bestselling games on your system (Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto) are also widely regarded as Xbox games, then you really aren't that iconic.

Very inspiring.



Hardware wise? Absolutely. But as an all encompassing brand of hardware and IP, it's not even on the same stratosphere.



d21lewis said:
At one point, Mario was more recognized than Mickey mouse. My mom still calls every console "Nintendo" and my job has a "No Gameboy" policy ( which I circumvented by bringing a PSP instead. Suckers!).

I just don't hear video gaming called "PlayStation" any more than I hear Nancy Grace of some pundit call it "Nintendo" or "Xbox". Even the president called gaming " Xbox ". Of course I live in North America, though.

I remember bringing a DS to a conference where we weren't allowed PSPs. I succeded.



Goodnightmoon said:
DerNebel said:

I didn't deny that, but classifying the changes made between different Mario or Zelda titles as taking a real risk is laughable at best.

But making huge changes on widely iconic franchises with milions of fans is always a huge risk because you risk yourself to lose all those fans doing something they don´t want, is a different kind of risk than to make a new IP, sure, but is also a risk. Just look the backlash that Wind Waker had because the artstyle was completely new and different even if today is considered one the most beautiful games Nintendo has ever made.

They're not changing them beyond recognisability though. If Nintendo came out and said "We've made the next 3D Mario into a FPS" then you'd have a point, that would be a real risk, but taking a highly iconic franchise and character, keeping the core game very much in tact and then giving it a new artstyle and some other bells and whistles is only risking to make less profit but not actually risking to lose money. You use Wind Waker as an example, that game still sold 4.6 million copies on Gamecube, despite the differences.



There are much more iconic than Nintendo since the first Playstation. Sony was new in this market and they sold 3x more Playstation consoles than Nintendo 64 consoles. And in the next generation they dominated everything with Playstation 2. Playstation 2 sold more than 7x than the Gamecube. When you ask people today what they associate with gaming almost everyone will tell about Playstation. Since Playstation released they are much more iconic than Nintendo.