• An old favorite feature returns: Q&ERA is back! This time we'll be collecting questions for Remedy Entertainment, makers of Max Payne, Alan Wake, Quantum Break, and Control. Members can submit questions for the next 15 hours, 7 minutes, 59 seconds. Submissions will close on Dec 12, 2019 at 12:00 AM.

PlayStation is best-selling home video game console brand ever, with over 450 million units sold across the original PlayStation, PS2, PS3, and PS4

LCGeek

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,439
An amazing achievement for sure.

Sony surviving against known brands, surviving that time when everyone and their grandmother released a home console...whatever caveats one wants to put with it doesn't matter. Doing what they did and do isn't easy.
Sony was in to gaming literally since the 90's. The had arcade and home console products and the arcade products were under playstation architecture as well.

What they didn't wasn't easy but looking back in hindsight next to MS no one made the moves sony did to get where they are now. Nintendo is fucking joke when having this level of discussion they knew better but often aimed big and disappointed. Sony since PS1 everytime has some managed to put together a sdk that people want to use with hardware that is decent vs a company that knew better wanted profits and fucked themselves and everyone over to get there.

I'm not posting to say what they did is easy but if you're persistent, got a lot of money your competitors don't and will act in ways you're competitors won't it's not hard to see why they sold a lot more hardware.
 

metalgear89

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,034
Did they give an explanation of why vgchartz was used? Vgchartz uses surveys and other stats to formulate the sales data and quite regularly do massive adjustments once companies release actual data. Surely they could have just gone to sony?
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,346
Sony wouldn’t be able to verify their own numbers to the GWR as it looks suspect as fuck, so they probably just gave their financial data to VGChartz to verify and then gave it to GWR to corroborate.
Yeah, no.

Also technically speaking now that I think about it, they didn't really need to go through a third party classifier for this? Guinness itself is the third party classifier. Obtaining the sales numbers from the company itself (which legally can't lie about it) for publicity's sake would be fine in this case.
 
Jun 23, 2019
1,257
Wouldn't Sony supplying info to the independent source defeat the whole point of an independent source? I'm mostly saying Sony most definitely did not supply data to VGChartz.
? How is this any different then say a student taking his work and giving it to a professor to verify? World records aren’t just arbitrarily given out. You have to actually go through a process of requesting the GWR to verify the record independently or by the GWR themselves, and then the record is given through their consultancy service. Exceptions apply like due to sports or what have you, but most certainly Sony either provided their public sales records or signed off on VGChartz’s verification. GWR didn’t just wake up November 7th and was like, “Oh Sony has the world record now!” Lol

https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records/the-application-process/standard-applications.html

Guided applications for businesses and organisations
If you require a more tailored, hands-on application, then you can choose a guided application. Our consultancy services give businesses and organisations a variety of options to help with record attempts from start to finish, covering everything from record consultancy and creative campaigns, to creating unforgettable live events with adjudicators.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,346
How is this any different then say a student taking his work and giving it to a professor to verify?
Because in this scenario you're suggesting the teacher verify their work to the student.

That said, I just think it's funny people are defending the use of a banned info site now.

Sure but it won't change the fact that PlayStation is the top selling gaming brand ever. A mighty record considering they only entered in the 90's.
You really should know better by now.
 

jroc74

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,471
Sony was in to gaming literally since the 90's. The had arcade and home console products and the arcade products were under playstation architecture as well.

What they didn't wasn't easy but looking back in hindsight next to MS no one made the moves sony did to get where they are now. Nintendo is fucking joke when having this level of discussion they knew better but often aimed big and disappointed. Sony since PS1 everytime has some managed to put together a sdk that people want to use with hardware that is decent vs a company that knew better wanted profits and fucked themselves and everyone over to get there.

I'm not posting to say what they did is easy but if you're persistent, got a lot of money your competitors don't and will act in ways you're competitors won't it's not hard to see why they sold a lot more hardware.
I agree.

This post is one example of when folks say they're lucky dismisses what they have done and continue to do to be consistent. What you said is some of the reasons why they are successful.

Going back to the PS1, it wasn't a slam dunk that they would succeed. No one thought Apple and Android would knock out heavyweights in the smartphone world and be the only dominate players today.

Then there was a time when Atari and a whole slew of companies released home consoles. That Sony and Nintendo survived that onslaught is amazing.

That MS is still hanging in there is amazing.
 
Dec 11, 2017
254
It's embarassing for the industry that they had to source Chartz...
752 million Nintendo consoles have been sold in 36 years, from 1983-2019.

549 million PlayStation consoles have been sold in 25 years, from 1994-2019.

Nintendo has been selling 20.89 million systems a year for 36 years and Sony has been selling 21.96 million systems a year for 25 years. In both cases however, the years 1983 and 1994, reflect their respective consoles’ single country starts.

If you go 1985-2019, then 752 million systems divided by 34 years is 22.12 million a year for Nintendo.
If you go 1995-2019, then 549 million systems divided by 24 years is 22.88 million a year for Sony.

(In my last two breakdowns, it lumps the former Japanese-only sales for both systems, in with each console’s global entry points.)

Either way you look at it, both Nintendo and Sony respectively are almost equally matched in terms is console sales presence.
 
Jun 23, 2019
1,257
Because in this scenario you're suggesting the teacher verify their work to the student.

That said, I just think it's funny people are defending the use of a banned info site now.
lol I love how you completely skipped over not only the rest of my post which provided you a guideline on how Sony went about getting this record, but managed to skip the post from someone who works for VGChartz earlier in the thread who explained their process. And even if it’s a banned site, all of this information is easily verifiable from Sony’s publicly published financial reports. Methinks this whole thing is bothering you more than you are letting on.
 

LCGeek

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,439
I agree.

This post is one example of when folks say they're lucky dismisses what they have done and continue to do to be consistent. What you said is some of the reasons why they are successful.

Going back to the PS1, it wasn't a slam dunk that they would succeed. No one thought Apple and Android would knock out heavyweights in the smartphone world and be the only dominate players today.

Then there was a time when Atari and a whole slew of companies released home consoles. That Sony and Nintendo survived that onslaught is amazing.

That MS is still hanging in there is amazing.
I never used the word luck and hate the implication especially in a business topic. Some of the facts we agree are in sony's favor not to put them down. I literally said they were doing things there competitors had no balls or foresight to do that's not luck, period.

I'm just saying acting like they came out of nowhere betrays the tenacity they had to become what they are today. They were there and doing plenty while most just focused on the product and not necessarily what they did to make it work.

Sony has survived other brands in other industries, why should gaming be any different?

I don't think atari was all that great. They had a great spot at the start of the 80s but they squandered and weren't keen to how the industry was changing. Sony has shown they have plenty of insight and understanding of how things can change. They are comeback kings even when they are down.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,346
lol I love how you completely skipped over not only the rest of my post which provided you a guideline on how Sony went about getting this record, but managed to skip the post from someone who works for VGChartz earlier in the thread who explained their process. And even if it’s a banned site, all of this information is easily verifiable from Sony’s publicly published financial reports. Methinks this whole thing is bothering more than you are letting on.
Alright, so.

1. I didn't need to quote everything else in your post, you were literally right above me. Nor do I have to respond to you listing the guideline? Like why would I have to respond to that, you presented it. It's real.

2. I did not skip over that post. VGChartz self-correcting after public numbers are out is not new, but we also established that public data is STILL different from estimates provided by VGChartz.

3. Literally the only problem I've had here was mentioning "haha VGChartz, anyways congratulations" but now suddenly tons of people rally for a website that was so notoriously inaccurate for video game sales data that you can't link it, that only recently rectified some parts of its structure, because they helped get Sony an award that they deserved. Like I didn't even say they didn't deserve it. That's the fucked up part here. I didn't even discredit Playstation being deserving of having this award. But no now suddenly I'm being told I'm salty somehow, or that I'm bothered by Playstation's sales numbers? I already knew their sales numbers.
 
Jun 23, 2019
1,257
Alright, so.

1. I didn't need to quote everything else in your post, you were literally right above me. Nor do I have to respond to you listing the guideline? Like why would I have to respond to that, you presented it. It's real.

2. I did not skip over that post. VGChartz self-correcting after public numbers are out is not new, but we also established that public data is STILL different from estimates provided by VGChartz.

3. Literally the only problem I've had here was mentioning "haha VGChartz, anyways congratulations" but now suddenly tons of people rally for a website that was so notoriously inaccurate for video game sales data that you can't link it, that only recently rectified some parts of its structure, because they helped get Sony an award that they deserved. Like I didn't even say they didn't deserve it. That's the fucked up part here. I didn't even discredit Playstation being deserving of having this award.
Alright man. You got it. 👍🏾
 

Nanashrew

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,388
Congrats to Sony, but why VGChartz? The last time a company used VGchartz as a source, the information was totally wrong.
 

Hero

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,466
It's more than likely true but VGChartz is a fucking joke and honestly takes away a bit of the achievement.

 

Titik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,517
It sold more than the ‘Nintendo’ brand?

(Slightly joking because my grandparents think that all consoles are Nintendos).