I think that the key word here was "satisfying" and that really is the thing. What does the person want from the art. Some people only want an effective system for fighting some people only want a philosophical system for exercise. If the person is satisfied with the art then he or she is doing the right one.
I personally find Spanish fencing and goju to be satisfying in many ways along with numerous weapons styles. But in a fight i find a combination of catch-as-catch-can and pugilism to be satisfying. Honestly ballet footwork has helped me in the streets before.
Depends on what the individual wants. We can project our own goals onto another and then judge what that person is doing based on our goals but that isn't reasonable.
Would I want to have an Aikido-ka at my back when it is time to play "I bet my ass" ???? Absolutely not. But I'm not going to say that Aikido sucks just that it isn't primarily for fighting, but it wasn't designed for fighting by it's founder anyway. Modern boxing isn't primarily for street fighting and has dropped a lot of the skills of the bare knuckle pugilists.