Did anyone said wipeout was a sony 1st party game in the ps1 era??

Psygnosis baby!

There barely were any racing sims back then. And GT was better than them all too, making it definetive and unique.

Most good SNES games are 3rd party too... so I guess that loss is mutual.

Super Nintendo had many third party classics. But since it has tons of great Nintendo games too, the loss is not mutual.

First of all, Spyro and Crash never belonged to Sony so that leaves you with Gran Turismo that could be considered first party only because Sony bought the studio that made the game. That leaves about one and a half of the games you listed for Sony.

Second. Someone beat me to it, but your gaming lisence should indeed be revoked if you think Mario and Zelda are the only games that are highly praised by Nintendo.

Aside from ignoring Donkey Kong, when the Super Nintendo had three Donkey Kong Country games, you forget the following franchises: Metroid, F-Zero, Starfox and so on.

When it comes to first party Nintendo is unbeatable.

Sega beats Sony in that category too. They had Sonic, Golden Axe, the Phantasy Star games (Nuber 2 innovated RPGs heavily) and Streets of rage were considered staple Sega franchises in the 16-bit era. Granted, they are not as unique as say Mario or Zelda, but seriously how unique is Gran Turismo?

Yeah it does matter. If your comparing too consoles with incredible game libraries and one console has excellent first and third party games and the other has only excellent third party titles then the winner is the console with both. If the console maker with great first party content didn't exist gamers would have missed out on top notch games. If the third party dependent platform didn't exist gamers would have been playing those very same games on a different platform.