It doesn't really match up to the quality there either oddly. Firefox, Opera, and Chrome from what I can gather are all roughly equivalent browsers. Which one you would use comes down to personal preference. Market share really doesn't reflect that however. There are some diferences like Firefox having more add-ons, and Opera being more secure but those are a side effect of popularity rather than an indicator of quality.

Review scores are not a solid measure of the quality of a game or the quality of a companies performance.  If that was the case, Nintendo would have been bankrupt with the N64 and Sony would have more money than all other gaming companies combined.  As it so turned out, the opposite is true.

And as it so turned out, Nintendo is the company winning all the major awards this year as well.

Certainly, by last gen, Sony's first party was excellent.

But of all the studios you mentioned, only Polyphony, 989 and Psygnosis developed for PS1 while they were a part of Sony.

Looking at the large, popular PS1 games, with the exception of Gran Turismo, they are all third party games. Crash and Spyro. Final Fantasy. Need for Speed. Medal of Honor, MGS.

People think Sony's first party is better this gen than last because of the distinct lack of third party exclusives on any platform, not least the PS3. Again, many of the PS2's blockbuster exclusives were third party games. But by then, the first party had hit its stride, which is why most accept the PS2 to have one of the greatest libraries ever (if not the greatest).

Sony have bested the other platform publishers this year, along with the rest of EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc.

Easy victory.

Quality. That is a word I am seeing being thrown around this thread. My question is, who get's to decide quality?

Nice question. Usually "quality" is referring to metacritic score.

Imo, personal experience is the only way to decide if a game is quality or not. Reviews only function as some sort of guide. Again, imo.

@mai

And that may actually work for some, but at the same time metacritics may have absolutely zero meaning for someone else. I tried to use gamerankings, metacritics and the likes before, but I soon realized it didn't work for me.

Activision will probably get it just because of MW2. IMO Sony should get it.

There is such an award, and it went to Nintendo, I believe it was linked in like the 4th post.

*my thoughts*

Sorry, it goes to Nintendo as they've brought more gaming joy to more players than any other company this year. They are highly regarded amonst other publishers and gamers alike. While Sony's games may be pretty, fun and getting the high scores from hardcore review people, they fail to pull in profits or reach out to large numbers of gamers. Essentially go read the article over on gamasutra and you'll see that as a publisher, Nintendo has done a phenominal job.