While I won't argue that Sony has memorable characters they have nothing compared to Nintendo.

Nothing Sony has can compare to (to name a few): 

• Mario
• Luigi
• Bowser
• Princess Peach (Toadstool)
• Link
• Zelda
• Yoshi
• Pikatchu
• Goomba
• Pirahna Plant
• Kirby
• Bullet Bill

You see I could even throw in some lesser enemies that are so strongly tied to Nintendo that even my kids (3 and 5) can name what franchise they are from (without ever have played any games nor seen me play those games). 

So how does Zelda or Mario change on each playthrough? Or bloodborne?

On the changing at everyplay only sports games and the kind truly does it.

The otherside of the coin:
Nintendo isnt good at story telling, so they rarely do any of it (with their games) (most dont even have cut scenes or voice acting),
I wish that they would learn to do it better, but thats just my selfish wish I know.

^ you see how "bait" worthy what you wrote is? when your own words are said back to you (just story <--> replayabiliy swapped?

Plus:

Alot of Sony games are 30-60 hours long (to beat).
While Nintendo has some like Starfox that was 3 hours to beat, but didnt get roasted for it by critics because of "replayablity".
(how many people didnt get bored out of their minds, by the time they replayed it like 2-3 times? and was their enjoyment higher than if they played a good quality story based game?)

I'd argue that something like God of War, many people have probably beat multiple times.
Spiderman is something thats also easily replayable, simply because people enjoy the feeling of swinning around and the combat.
Hell even Ratchet & Clank.

Its not like Sony games dont have any replayability at all, and its just something magically that only nintendo has.


MODs..... why are so many Nintendo fans in here being allowed to bait this much?

What people mean by that is that it's a general term applied to games that are in the style of The Last of Us, Uncharted, or God of War, not necessarily ones that literally star "Sad Dads" specifically. Big budget, third-person, movie-like spectacles with an emphasis on set-pieces, realism, and melodramatic stories. Quite a few people are kind of getting sick of this formula recently, and would like Sony to scale it back a bit for the PS5.

Who said anything about Mario and Zelda?

Bloodborne can change due to different builds and concentrating on different stats. Finding new shortcuts and areas. Doing or skipping certain bosses and new game plus.

Going back to the games that you brought up for some reason, Mario games don't all change with each play through but they often have different paths to take and 3d games tend to give you lots of choices on what you want to do. Odyssey is a great example of this most moons are optional and a lot can be gotten in more than one way. It helps that Mario games tend to be on the shorter side making them easy to blast through again and again.

Zelda games don't tend to have a lot of replay value with some exceptions being the shorter ones and the ones that give more freedom. BOTW is a good example of a highly replayable Zelda game. With the game allowing you to do as much or as little as you want. 

I think when it comes to replay value having the game be less scripted and having a consistent pace are important factors along with length. Generally people aren't as likely to to rush back to a 100 hour long rpg. There are of course exceptions like fire emblem three houses which has replay value for obvious reasons.

If you consider that to change bloodborne then on Uncharted 4 you can choose different weapons which change the damage output and speed you do the damage, the distance to fight off and also the paths are a lot broader than before.

You are just exaggerating in the one direction to take jabs at one game and on the other to protect another. 

I would argue Rayman and Lara Croft are quite iconic. But true, Nintendo has a great talent to develop lasting characters. Maybe because they don't give up on them and jump to a different series. Sony abandoned Spyro and Crash, maybe if they had stick with them they would be as iconic today as Mario.

Yeah, I thought of Lara Croft after I made that comment.  She might be close to the Master Chief level.  I don't think I see Rayman in that group though.  Regardless, non them are Sony properties.  

If I had to choose one publisher right now, and could only play games from that pub, I'd have to choose Sony.  They're making a lot of great games.  But, they just don't have the right types of games or characters to move into that Mushroom Kingdom conversation.  It doesn't matter how many great God of War or Uncharted games they make.  Those properties will not make it into the conversation.  I think that category is mostly reserved fro cartoony-type characters like Mario (and his cohorts) and Sonic.  I think the main reasons that Master Chief is in this conversation (and, to be clear, he's nowhere near the level of the Nintendo properties, or even Sonic) is that Chief has been a popular costume, there has been some expansion of the universe outside of gaming, and Halo was a mega-popular gaming franchise right around the time that gaming became a socially acceptable entertainment medium for adults. If Halo just came about today, I don't think it could make it to that level.  We could probably make a similar case for Croft - the timing was right.  She probably wouldn't make it to that level today.