Yes, generally speaking.

Direct voting was intentionally discouraged by some of the founders, to prevent the "tyranny of the majority". The goal was to force a candidate to appeal to as many types of people as possible, and not allow someone to just focus on what the simple majority of people want.

It could be argued that in this election the electoral college technically performed the function it was originally designed to do -- that is, give rural areas a small but possible opportunity to out-compete urban ones in an election despite having less total citizens.

In one sense the electoral college worked as intended. Except that it does not function as intended. As intended it was to be a deliberate body that would debate the candidates and decide the next, best president from all options given. It was meant to be a final review process to make sure a tyrant or despot didn't get through, for instance.

It goes to how the election should be interpreted.

Donald Trump is clearly the President-elect of the United States and will become the chief executive of the country.

But that is different than the election demonstrating that he is the ideological leader of a majority of the country.