PlayStation is the most consistently succesful console maker... yes. They create products that sell.
But other than that I have no idea what the premise of this thread is. Double Standards?
NES being considered more succesful than PS3 while selling less isn't a double standard. You can't compare the video game industry in the 80's with that it was decades later.
I agree with your post as a whole, but Playstation isn't even the most consistently successful console maker. They come in first place 50% of the time, while people treat them like they come in first 100% of the time. It's like there is this reality distortion field caused by cherry picking and misinformation. "Handheld systems don't count and the PS3 was actually a success."
Look at this. I'll put a * next to the first place systems.
PS1*, PS2*, PS3, PS4*, PSP, PS Vita
That is 3/6 = 50%. Playstation has a 50% win percentage. Now look at Nintendo systems:
NES*, SNES*, N64, Gamecube, Wii*, Wii U, Gameboy*, Virtual Boy, GBA*, DS*, 3DS*
That is 7/11 = 64%. Nintendo has a higher win percentage. This is with me not counting Switch or GB Color, but I am counting Virtual Boy. (VB technically had no competitors, but I'd still count it as a loss.) When you actually count every system Nintendo has the highest win percentage. It is also the "most consistently successful console maker", because it's handhelds have never been defeated.
If there is a reason why "Playstation is held to high expectations", it's because people think it is performing better than it actually is. It only wins 50% of the time. It is not the most consistently successful either. Anyone care to look at financial statements? Get those out and you'll find Nintendo performs far better there too. Nintendo is the most consistently successful console maker, and yet people like to talk about it going third party. Is it really Playstation that people are being unfair to?
Last edited by The_Liquid_Laser - on 08 July 2020