I don't think he was saying it would increase enjoyment, but rather it would not decrease enjoyment, while at the same time, making the game easier to understand, and potentially faster.
But I disagree. I don't think it will make the game faster because the only real drastic changes are for OB and lost balls, and how many people not playing in a tournament ever actually drive back to the tee to re-hit if they didn't hit a provisional? Almost none. And even when they do, overall, this doesn't slow down the game that much, in the grand scheme of things.
However, I don't know that I agree with Tristan/Erik/Et. Al. that there has to be a greater penalty for OB than there does for hazards. (I keep going back and forth on this) Admittedly, my opinion is extremely biased on this because I tend to hit it OB more than your average golfer, but the fact that different courses seem to arbitrarily mark certain areas OB vs. hazard is what gets me. I had one last week that was, literally, 12" beyond the cart path, and sitting perfectly on top of the mulch with a clear shot to the green. I mean, this shot wasn't 10 yards from being in the fairway, it was perfectly playable, and it cost me stroke and distance.
I think I would be on board with a re-write of the rules that changed OB to the equivalent of an ESA hazard. Not stroke and distance, but since it's usually off the courses property, you cannot play it from there. That seems like a reasonable compromise. (Of course, I'm also fine with the rules how they are, but if, for whatever reason, they changed that one, I don't think it would fundamentally change the game, nor would it affect my enjoyment any)
Lost balls are trickier because you never quite know where they were.