My opinion on the matter (wanted or not, tough, you're getting it) is that he's half right.
In terms of the innovation, freedom and flexibility that the PC system offers to up and coming developers it's a no-brainer. The great console games of the future will likely be born through a PC, but would they become great if it weren't for the consoles they can sell them on?
The area that Mr Levine's argument falls down is really obvious. The cost of entry and to a greater extent, keeping up with the PC gaming world is extreme and no longer justifiable for a lot of consumers. It's been said time and time again that developing HUGE games on the PC is a pain because of the near infinite variations of hardware, drivers, software and firmware. So instead of the Dev's keeping up, we're expected to:
a) Go out and spend 6 months worth of hard savings on a top-notch gaming PC
b) Spend every subsequent months savings on a new hardware/firmware update
c) Not have any money to buy actual games
When you buy a console you pay a 5th of the initial investment and...well then you start buying games.
PC's may be easier for indie developers, because they can just make it work for them and anyone with a similar system. These guys may then take this experience to produce amazing PC and Console games in the years to come. But if Tarantino can turn a career in a movie rental shop into an astonishing set of films, why not expect the same from that guy at gamestation? You know the guy I mean, he's got too much hair and always smells of armpit...