Basically this. Also, who "wins" a year is highly dependent on personal preferences so even for a guy who plays both Sony and Nintendo games, there's no definite answer.

A better article/thread would have been "Nintendo is having a very good year 2017" with a list of they've done so far and what's to come.

I would not call Nintendo fans "cocky". They are simply being honest, which in some cases may be confused with arrogance but only by those in denial.

0.0 That looks so sexy!

Uh? But that goes in circles? If there is no way to determine a common tendency, a tangent, because you reject the basics of the arguments I made, although they are accepted by a majority, I can't really debate on that. I'm sorry you have so little faith in the review system. 

And btw, fuck no. I didn't say it was pure objectivity. I said aggregation are able to weed out some of the poorest reviews in terms of quality and argumentativity. There isn't any fallacy about that. Critics are not the only way to try and establish objectivity, they are a part of it.

It's not that I have little faith in the review system, I just understand what it is. It's mostly composed people like you and me that are decent writers and decided to play and review games for a living. That's it. As a result, I use reviews as an indicator of whether or not I will like a game, not to determine whether one game is objectively better than another. You can't remove the subjectivity out of personal preference, and I don't pretend that it can be mitigated enough to be reasonably objective.

Now you're acting like Metacritic is some kind of authority? From their FAQ

"Why don't you include my publication in your panel?

We are always on the lookout for new sources of quality, well-written reviews that are well regarded in the industry or among their peers. Several times throughout the year, we will re-evaulate our current group of publications and make additions and deletions to our panel if necessary. If you feel that your publication deserves inclusion among this elite group, please let us know. Remember, we are only looking for high-quality websites (or print publications).

Can you tell me how each of the different critics are weighted in your formula?

So you have a group of people that are deciding which reviews to count and which ones to ignore, and weighting them differnetly based on uhhh... erm... secret sauce. How can this be seen as even reasonably objective?

Probably, but that's only because NS debut on march while sony's year was on january 1, but 4 months out of 6 the NS has been on the market won sales wise to the ps4 on USA and in japan all 6 months has won the sales war to the ps4.

Rigth now the NS is the hot platform to get, and it will only get bigger with the games are coming, yeah nintendo won 2017.

https://venturebeat.com/2017/09/14/nintendo-switch-outsold-xbox-one-and-playstation-4-again-in-august/

So you aren't supporting the initial claim, yet you didn't say it, but then gone to support that person points that are used to prove the initial point... makes a lot of sense.

And you are talking about autorithy being important on this but go and deny the other person credential (which are bigger than yours and most critics, how does that make sense).

Fallacy of authority is always bad on argumentation. It doesn't matter the name or position of who makes the claim (or who you quote), the point itself matters.

I have seem far too much reviewers being unprofessional and developers lying to their benefit to consider their opinion as fact or above my own position.

Aggregation of opinions won't ever be objective.. the plural of annedocte isn't data/statistic the same as the plural of opinion isn't fact/truth. So your point demolishes itself, and that is why is needed to intervene, because you are pushing something wrong and pretend to be right moving the goalpost all along.

I felt like we all had a truce for console wars for the last 9 months or so. Then this article shows up all hell breaks loose. This is only the beginning of course it will get much much worse. Everyone hide!

OT

Anyway obviously this will be very subjective. (Understatement of the year). However the article says Nintendo not Switch. So it means that Nintendo with 3DS + Switch is doing better than anyone else. Regardless I agree with the article. But it is not like that is a surprise

There is no system in itself that is fail-safe. Maybe it isn't strict enough, and maybe our industry needs to tighten up the looses in order to be considered ''more objective'' or of better quality. Why is there 108 critics out there to evaluate Breath of the Wild and 50 for a movie like Dunkerke? Maybe because we need to cut half of these. Maybe half of these shouldn't be allowed to be even considered. Maybe the selection process isn't harsh enough.

We have to make do with something. At least, for now. An average from Gamerankings, Metacritic or whatever else is better at giving a common tendency than... say... your personal opinion? Your personal opinion is the most important thing to you, but for everyone else, for someone who wants the most objective review possible, how do you do? An average can be a good way to.

I agree that Nintendo is having a great year, but Sony is also having a ridiculously good year, and the ps4 has provided more games that I'm interested in this year, including my personal favorite (so far), Horizon. So, I disagree, though I'm glad to own both a ps4 and a Switch. 

This list-war thread is especially dumb as it focuses on Nintendo's obsolete handheld. If you're going to embarrass yourself by using lists as your argument (OP and original author), then at least use one that's relevant.