Does any one have the latest-known (officially published) yearly sales for the PS2? Maybe from 2007 to 2012 or similar. Just to figure/picture how the yearline decline in sales was for PS2, and use it to check if that "above 160 million" number is really possible or they're just bragging.

You can see all of that in my Historical Consoles Showdown.

It's with pure shipment numbers and sold after 2007 officially from Sony, up until March of 2012.

As a heads up, with the PS2 confirmed to have sold over 160 million it means we had the PS Vita overtracked, so have been working on adjusting the sales numbers down. 

Sony had given us a 525.3 million units sell-through for all PlayStation consoles combined as of July/August 2018. We knew how much PS1, PS3, PSP, and PS4 sold at that point. The question was how much the PS2 had sold lifetime. Then it was subtracting all those numbers from the 525.3 million figure to get an idea for PS Vita. After that date the PS Vita was only in production until March 2019. So while we don't know exact PS Vita sales we have a much better idea now and it showed we had it overtracked.

PS Vita adjustments have been done Asia, MEA, and Other Europe.

https://sonyinteractive.com/en/press-releases/sony-interactive-entertainment-introduces-playstation4-pro-500-million-limited-edition/

Take your own advice because it doesn't align with reality. Nintendo doesnt care but to say Sony doesn't looks ridiculous. They could have announced this in 2018, yet decided against lol. Did they not know, despite it being a platform discontinued in 2013? A prior president says it randomly on a podcast and now all of a sudden they cant wait to tell the world? You don't think they are aware of Switch? Sony has a video celebrating the history of PS and when they start talking about the future of PS, they start talking about a platform (Switch) they don't own? You think Nintendo would ever start talking about PS in a celebratory video about Nintendo's history? Literally another section of their site still says 155 as of 2012. I get it, the defense force is out in full force for PS but no need to quote others on something thats very reasonable to accuse them of. The evidence is stacked against them and yet they still reframe from being fully open about it.

Also Sony is in what position? The same Sony that told their own employees to do better with their profit margins or the same Sony laying people off? 

That's awesome! Thanks for taking the time, and for the hard work, of putting all that data together.

So, with those numbers... Do you think it is feasible that PS2 was able to sell the remaining 2.7 millions required to reach 160 millions? (your data ends with it on 157,330,000, so that 2.7 million figure is what would have need to reach the recent official number). In order to achieve that it would have need to sell an average of 337.500 units per quarter during the following two years (or 675.000 per quarter the following year), If im not mistaken.

It seems odd, but I just checked the things .. Sony gave PS2 numbers, up until the DS was pretty much done. The last one was 155M till march 2012. And at that time DS was clearly not reaching it. After that they stopped. It's like they want to show that they are ahead, and once they saw that the DS is not a threat they stopped putting exact numbers, just to leave a door out, if in future other system comes close, they could easily announce what the PS2 has done since the last official number - 155M, but at the same time using the time being (those years after 2012) to hide the Vita's failure. And if future system comes close they can go out and say 160M - as now, since PS2 system were selling from march 2012 up until way into 2013.

Yep, they could easily sell them till the quarter ending march 2013. This is one year time to sell those systems, or 10 months to produce and ship them to the stores (since PS2 was discontinued in January 2013). It sold 4.1M the previous Fiscal year after all and 6.4M the fiscal year before that. What are 2.7M more ? The drop is there, and obviously the units have to be there, according to Sony. Everything is inline for one dying system, having last three fiscal years as 6.4M, 4.1M, and finally 2.7M. By today standards it wouldn't even be discontinued yet, as 2.7M is far from a year where you have to discontinue the system, but as far as I remember there were articles back then that were saying Sony is doing it because they are starting to prepare for the PS4 production.

PS2 was discontinued in January 2013, so it didn't have a full year for its final year. It sold 4.1 million in its second to last fiscal year brining it to 155.1 as of March 2012. It would be discontinued in January 2013, so it's final year would be between April 2012 to January 2013 or roughly 10 months. Sony is saying they sold more in its final year April 2012 to January 2013 (atleast 4.9 million to hit 160 minimum) than it did in its second to last year (4.1 million year). That does sound quite unreasonable and is why people are accusing them of lying because it isn't a financial crime to lie in a podcast; however, it is reasonable for a system to get one final push before discontinuation and I don't think Sony would lie on their site. They are definitely not lying on the site, so PS2 should be put above 160 but below 161.

Those are the official fiscal year report for the PS2. After 2007 they are sales as far as I know. And I don't know how and why we have 153.2M at the end of march 2011, and if the 155.1M is true at the end of march 2012, then PS2 should've sold only 1.9M in that timeframe, but the report was 4.1M. And those are official numbers .. I went over the web to search and everything lines up. The only thing that can do the mess is the shipped/sales numbers info changing from 2007 onwards. Either I am missing something, or there is something not too accurate with all of this .. if 153.2M is the number till march 2011, when we add 4.1M we get the 157.3M number, I got in my comparison table. Which easily left out only 2.7M more for the next 10 months which is perfectly doable, coming from 4.1M fiscal year.

And just for reference to anyone who would want to dig all this up, here is another custom table made with official info for the shipments but not so sure about the sales .. (and obviously made up numbers after march 2012) which I found somewhere.

"All of a sudden they can't wait to announce it to the world"
By waiting 8 months after he made the comment?

And "announcing it to the world" by not having it anywhere on their Twitter, but only viewable after visiting their website, an additional 3 clicks deep to get to the PS2 section of the 30th Aniiversary articles, and then having to scroll down half the page?

I don't care about defense forces as long as they actually consider the logic surrounding their argument.
When someone doesn't even make an attempt, they're just letting their emotions rule them.

The shipment periods near the end of PS2's production were lumped in together with PS3 and Vita. This continued for Vita, presumably to mask its poor sales. Xbox did similar things with some of their underperforming systems, etc.
Grouping them together like that lead to the theoretical range for Vita being as ridiculously wide as 50% more or less. Mission accomplished.

If they revealed the PS2 numbers, it would undo the purpose of masking the Vita figures.
While that would be less of an issue today, Vita was still in production in 2018.

I didn't suggest that there's not a single higher up at Sony that cares at all. I said not even remotely close to the people that are being emotional about it now.
So they're not likely to have a press conference about it years later. Jim Ryan mentioned it in passing on a podcast.
And now it's PlayStation's 30th Anniversary.

The question for any serious person was never if Sony were maliciously making it up.
It was whether Ryan mispoke. Did he remember the correct figure off the top of his head? Was he rounding up, or down? Etc.

With it being on their 30th Anniversary website, it means that someone at Sony signed off on this.

Lines up with what I said about their only real care being money.
They wouldn't be highly paid excecs if they weren't hyper focused on profit.