I am not saying any of that, that is all you. My only point was that the dude was comparing apples to oranges. Like comparing diesel fuel to solar power and saying the former it's better simply because more people know about it.
Comparing apples and oranges? I don't think you know what that means.
Comparing the popularity of Nintendo and Sony mascots is not comparing apples and oranges, no matter how unfair that comparison maybe. That saying has nothing to do with unfairness, it has to do with comparing ideas that upon close examination aren't that similar. Mascot to Mascot is a pretty direct comparison, especially when they're in the same industry.
The saying is perfect, both apples and oranges are fruits, but they are completely different kinds of fruits. In this case the guy was comparing mascots, completely different kinds of mascots, and saying the mascots owner (Nintendo) was the "king of video games" simply because more people recognized its mascots.
Edit: These are the original comments where this small debate started.
To research who the actual king of video games is, try this experiment.
Hold up portraits of Mario, Kratos or MC. Ask about 1000 random people in the street who they recognize.
Thats not very impressive considering nintendo has been milking the same 10 characters for over 20 years. Imagine if Sony started making 3-5 Kratos games and spinoffs every generation, what would happen in 20 years? Anyways all of Nintendos characters are kid friendly so they can make tons of toys and other merchandise, so of course more people will know of the characters. Yet this means nothing to the king of video games title, now if it was the king of video games merchandise or king of video game toys or maybe king of reusing IPs, then I would agree. Just did I quick search and since 1981 and there are around 300 video games featuring the character MARIO.