Not even close:

-PS1: Crash Bandicoot and Crash Bandicoot Racing

-PS2: Jak and Daxter, Jak X: Combat Racing

-PS3: Uncharted and Last of Us

-PS4: Uncharted and Last of US

Now try to compare that with Rare just on N64 platform:

-Killer Instinct Gold

-Blast Corps

-GoldenEye 007

-Banjo-Kazooie

-Diddy Kong Racing

-Jet Force Gemini

-Donkey Kong 64

-Conker's Bad Fur Day

-Perfect Dark

-Mickey's Speedway

Rare just on N64 have more diverse games than Naughty Dog last 4 generations combined.

But what I find very impressive about Naughty Dog is they went from Crash Bandicoot to Last of US.

You clearly missed the “critically acclaimed blockbusters” part, I’m sure there’s devs out there who’ve tried their hands at many different genres, especially back in the day when it took only a couple months to make a game. Point is none of them put out 90+ rated titles in so many different genres and set sales records on top of it.

So... your criteria is 90+ titles in different genres, and sales records?  Ok... strange criteria for diversity, but let's go with that.  

Naughty Dog has created 90+ titles in 2 genres.  Third Person Shooter (Last of Us/Uncharted 2/3) and Platformers (Jak 1 and Crash 3).  These games have combined for about 40 million.  Certainly not bad.

Let's compare that to Nintendo EPD.  They have 90+ games in three different genres.  Platformer (Mario Odyssey), Adventure (Breath of the Wild), and racing (MK8 Deluxe).  The those titles have combined to sell 30 million copies.

Pretty close right?  But Nintendo EPD has only been officially a thing for 3 years.  Compared to nearly 25 for Naughty Dog.

None of this is a knock on Naughty Dog btw.  They make good games, but diversity is not their strong suit.  In their 2+ decades of existence, they've basically worked on 4 franchises and a few spin offs of those.  Calling them the most diverse developer (easily no less) is ridiculous.

MK64 and Super Mario Kart are much better games. SMK created the genre and was one of the best games of the generation. MK64 elevated it to another level. MK8 is really incrementalism. 

Except for the fact that Nintendo EPD did not create those IPs and and just made entries in 3 decade long running franchises that get high scores and sell a ton regardless of quality. When Nintendo EPD creates an IP from scratch and gets the same response then you can compare them to ND, as of now comparing them is an insult to Naughty Dog.

Well, it is true that MK8 is built from previous iterations of MK (besides Double Dash it looks), but to say that SMK and MK64 are better? Can't really agree there. I played both of those games, and while they did set some ground work for future titles, I really would rather play MK8 over them. Heck, most games with sequels usually tend to be better than the originals, and they should be, as they should be improving from their 1st iterations.

There's really no reason to play SMK aside from nostalgia.  64 holds up a little better, but still isn't nearly as fun as 8.  They were more influential sure, but that doesn't mean better.

Haha.  I ALMOST wrote at the end of my first post that I was sure you would add another criteria to explain why this didn't count, just like you did when someone used Rare as an example. 

However, EPD did create those franchises.  Under their old names, (Nintendo S&P and Nintendo R&D 1 and 2 before that).  These are just all different names Nintendo gave their internal development studio.   I chose to limit it to the games made under EPD because I needed to give them a bit of a handicap to make it a relatively fair fight ;). Of course I'm sure that you'll find a name change as a perfectly valid reason to discount their work.

At this point, I think this is trolling, but feel free to prove me wrong by explaining how making good games in a whopping 2 different genres qualifies you as easily the most diverse developer of all time. Cause honestly, that doesn't seem like much of an achievement.