How many of these people running these game companies actually know anything about videogames?
He'll probably point to Sony (and possibly Microsoft though they're not looking too hot right now). The problem with these comparisons is that none of these companies have all the answers. There are things Sony gets right that Nintendo gets wrong. There are things Nintendo gets right that Sony gets wrong. Same with Microsoft. There's very little chance for a one-size-fits-all console because so many people want different things. Best case scenario, a company meets the requirements of most gamers with the choices they make. To that end, I suppose Sony wins this round. Despite its flaws, Sony collectively gets the most amount of things right (only because 3DS is missing some key features).
No hardware maker gets it entirely right or comes close, even if Sony is
closest. To me, only Nintendo has justified releasing a new console so far and that's mostly because they were in most need of releasing one. Wii U rectifies some (but not nearly all) of its predecessor's shortcomings just by
being. I look at PS4 and I think, "I want one" not "I
want one." For a lot of people, it took a year and a half to reach that point for Wii U, capped off by Mario Kart 8. That's unacceptable considering Nintendo sat on Wii for like two years longer than they should have.
Ultimately, I'm not ready or willing to praise any of these companies. I'm not awarding someone for average work or because they didn't outright fail. Do better. I defend Iwata because he's done an okay job (especially with 3DS) and a replacement would most certainly be worse, but still, do better. We've seen improvements, slowly but surely which is funderful and all. No gold star awarded for effort.