The man develops video games to be sold and played by other people. His primary target is Windows, so he develops on Windows.
So it's good enough - the mantra of software development that explains a lot of what he's talking about. He's not entitled to being able to "just put pixels on a screen" while also distributing his games to be ran on his users' computers. He could develop his games for MS-DOS, but he has chosen not to.
Look, I complain about software quality probably more than most, but it's good to remember that it's more of an emotional issue rather than an objective one. I did not find his arguments about programmer productivity convincing. As a whole, software is doing what it's supposed to and, besides, it could have always been worse.
For balance, he does make a good point about the upper limit of complexity and how hard it is to transfer the knowledge required to the next person doing the job. Perhaps if we normalized documenting everything to the point where someone new could just pick it up by reading the docs as well as get the time from the company to actually do it, there might be more incentives to keep things simpler.