I think profits should be the best metric used to measure the success of the consoles. 

The Nintendo Switch made ten times more profits than the PS2, nearly three times more than the PS4, and more than the NDS+WII. 

There is no possible way to know this. You have no way of separating PS2 costs and profits from PS1/PSP/PS3/Vita R&D, Cost and losses/profits. 

Just take a look at the graph below and tell me which part of the gaming era is the most profitable.

Yep, exactly like I said. You are taking the financials for the entire gaming division. The statement of "Switch made ten times more profits than the PS2" is impossible to backup. I'm not denying Nintendo profits are far higher in the Switch era than the profits of PlayStation during that time. We cannot put a figure on how much profit the PS2 made because it is lumped in with the profits and losses and R&D costs of all their other consoles.

I find it really cool to see how Nintendo's profits are dropping by. Its peak is 21/3 at ~635,000 M Yen, then drops ~-6% in 22/3 to ~596,000 M Yen, and drops ~-15% in 23/3 to ~506,000 M Yen. It is a very steady and calm dropping compared to the Wii/DS era which dropped ~-18% from its peak, and then ~-60% the following year. Just goes to show the power of the Switch, and showcases that it has some long legs if Nintendo decides to keep it alive. I expect around a ~-20% to ~400M Yen in 24/3 for Nintendo.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mediocre#:~:text=%3A%20of%20moderate%20or%20low%20quality,performance%20%3A%20ordinary%2C%20so%2Dso

“of moderate or low quality, value, ability or performance

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mediocre#

“Of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate”

“Not satisfactory; poor; inferior”

I don’t see any contradiction with the definition of mediocre and what my previous post says. Something can absolutely be the best year in x amount of years and be mediocre.

It's just like Xbox sales have been the best in a decade, but they are still totally awful.

Yes, and you get it is low of quality, value or performance because you compare to something it isn't directly comparable to, hope to have helped. God help us if anyone calls Switch a mediocre system.

No I described as mediocre due to the software performance, you can't just look at the hardware. Basically hardware good, software bad leading to mediocre overall. That's not hard to understand. It literally has worst software sales than WiiU, how is that excusable. You are obsessed with Switch I see, so please tell me how Switch would be mediocre without telling me something subjective? There is nothing subjective about selling less software than WiiU and being considered poor performance. On the other hand, Switch is the 3rd highest selling platform in hardware history and like 3rd or 4th in software (think PS2, PS4, and PS1 are still above it). Two of those platforms Switch smoked in hardware and I doubt PS1 stays ahead in software, even PS2 doesn't look out of reach but PS4 I think is way too high software wise. Switch is likely the most profitable system in history and maybe PS2 and PS4 have made more revenue. In what way is Switch's global performance comparable to PS5's performance in Japan? 

I’m not sure why you’re bringing up Switch, to be clear, I never even mentioned PS5 in any of my comments. I was not agreeing or disagreeing that it did mediocre, I was just disagreeing with your statement that, “best in 20 years year automatically means it did well”.

If my business lost money $1 million over the last 20 years and this year I made a $1 profit, I still didn’t have a good year just because it was the better than the last 20.

If a boxer gets knocked out in the first round in 20 straight fights and then makes it to the 2nd round before getting knocked in fight 21, they still didn’t do well despite doing better.