They are near the top, but it's hard to say if they are number 1. They make very, very solid and fun games, but haven't done anything truely great in years. I think they rank somewhere up there among Valve, Nintendo, Bungie, Naughty Dog and CD Projekt RED.

Debatable. Console gamers have more great developers to work with. PC gamers Blizzard is definitely king. For console games Rockstar, Bioware, Naughty Dog, Nintendo and much much more are competing for that table.

No, they have a great record but they also haven't released much.

If anything, they are one of the most respected in core multiplayer experiences.

Blizzard is the most overrated developer for sure.

While the best is obviously going to iterative of opinion, i do think they have to be one of the best for support. Updating diablo II even to this day.

Its also worth pointing out PC gamers in general are interested in different types of games than console gamers.

For example, what Valve does appeals more to console gamers. Or it atleast used to be that way.

I may be wrong but i feel that even if you see many genres from them, they all share one component : online with a least microtransactions. That's why the won't do any single player story driven game.
I play hearthstone and might be intersted in overwatched, but i can't stop feeling they're good to find an optimised formula for each of their (great) games, but in the end the games are a little soulless

well if you change the meaning of MMO like you have then sure 16 player max is MMO. However MMO DOESN'T stand for Massive Multiplayer Online. It stands for MASSIVELY Multiplayer Online, i.e. a bucket load more than 16 players.

I am more interested in knowing what those 4 genres Naughty Dog nailed? I can think of Crash being one of them, which is fair enough, they were fun platformers, but what are the other 3? Kart racing went from Great with CTR to below average with Jak X. There next platformer series Jak and Daxter are far from top of the table games. I would consider them good games but there nothing above that, let’s be totally honest here. There’s a reason they stopped making them. Naughty Dog are great at making linear action experiences like Uncharted and they did make great platformers with Crash for the PS1, however years later there next attempts at platforming and kart racing fell below par. Which is why you don’t see them jumping into those genres anymore. Rockstar are the same, they can produce GOTY games like Red Dead and GTA however that’s the only genre they work on.

I am saying what a company can do now, not what they did 2 to 3 generations ago. I use to consider Rare the best in the industry in the 90s but its quite clear that Rare of today is far from that mark, much like ND are with Crash. If we go by what you mentioned with ND and the genres they covered years ago then Rare would still hold that crown today by a big margin.

As for Blizzard losing their energy compared to the 90s? Not sure how they lost energy when today they have a lot more on their plate and become so much more as a company then what they ever dreamed of becoming.

I am not changing anything, you just corrected my spelling mistake, and the point still stands. As the general public see MMO you would expect MMO games to be a lot bigger than 16 players, however that’s generalising the genre because of a couple big hitting games that made the term popular. MMO does not stat how many players have to be counted for to earn the term MMO. If you can update me with a statement proving this, I would appreciate it and happily accept it.