I get it, but branding didn’t do much for Vita...

Not only Europe. WW minus USA still gives the lead to Sony. So when you want to say UK is insignificant (even though Wii sold well over there) then if only one country gives the victory to Wii then we can infer that WW PS3 was still more popular than Wii. And as I said, Playstation is a continuous brand so even if PS3 sold less than Wii if you go now, 10 years after the heydays of Wii and put playstation versus Wii in placards Playstation will win.

Yes, brand isn't all =p although Vita in itself is a good HW.

Meanwhile, here in the real world, Wii beat the PS3. 

Show placards of both Wii and PS3 around the world, and more people would recognize the Wii, because (a) significantly more people owned one, and (b) unlike the PS3, it was a cultural phenomenon.

Seriously, it's been a decade, that such denial still persists regarding Playstation's defeat last gen is just ridiculous. Move on already.

Wii is such as strong brand name that it's close to literally same-named successor was a neutron star level of collapsing  failure.

Let's get old school. Do you think the Wii was a better console than the PS3?

Wii U isn't relevant to this discussion. We are talking 7th gen, Wii vs PS3.

And yes, I do think the Wii was a better console than the PS3. But that's also irrelevant. Wii outsold the PS3, that's the bottom line.

It is relevant. The name "Wii" meant jack shit in the very next gen. Where was all the recognition for the Wii name? Lots of people must have thought the Wii-U sucked. Sucked soooooo hard that it's suckiness was able to counteract it's strength in the field of placard recognition. As for your personal tastes regarding Wii v PS3, fair enough.

Wii U is not the Wii. The PS Vita was also a spectacular failure despite bearing the Playstation name.

Show people placards of Wii and PS3 in the streets and you'd be lucky if 50% recognized the PS3. But probably 80% would know the Wii from the years where it was everywhere, on TV, at family gatherings, where it was the white hot new thing everyone wanted. And the fact that millions more people owned one than owned a PS3.

The Vita did bear the PS name, but it's failure is a once-off anomaly for the PS brand, with a well documented history of abandonment from Sony to accompany it. Nintendo has shit the bed way more often. Sony, and the PS brand, has a consistent level of excellence, with average console sales that no other platform holder can touch. So, with the Wii brand: If the name can't be parlayed into a successful followup, it's dead. And it IS dead. Long dead. That was the Wii-U. Wii is the Sanjaya Malakar of brands.....That's too harsh. It's the William Hung of brands. And again, speaking of dead, a higher percentage than is the norm, as it concerns  console customers, the ones that helped make the Wii software library so amazing, have faded into the ether.

I love Mystic's videos, he has a very laid back approach that's very refreshing

You don't seem to be aware of the specific topic under discussion and how we came to it, and why the Wii U has nothing whatsoever to do with it.

This discussion began with the assertion that "PS never stopped being the king of consoles", which implies that the PS3 was king last gen when it was getting thrashed by the Wii in sales, bleeding billions of dollars, and losing half of the marketshare it inherited from PS2.

The Wii U did not even exist at this time, so it's completely irrelevant.