Level-5 president and CEO Akihiro Hino has apologized after the company used generative AI in footage shown during its recent LEVEL5 VISION 2026 II presentation. The broadcast included new material for titles such as Yo-kai Watch 2: Haunted Domain and Professor Layton, leading some viewers to question whether AI-generated imagery was also being incorporated directly into the games themselves. Hino has now confirmed that AI was used in producing parts of the presentation, while attempting to distinguish that work from the core creative content of Level-5’s games.
In a statement published after the showcase, Hino said the company experimented with the latest AI technology because it wanted to make the presentation more visually elaborate. He acknowledged that the decision made some viewers uncomfortable and apologized for the concern it caused. The reaction followed close scrutiny of several sequences shown during the broadcast, with fans pointing to visual inconsistencies they believed were characteristic of generative AI.
Hino stressed that Level-5 still creates what he described as the defining elements of its games through human creators. That includes scenarios, character designs and the fundamental settings behind its projects. According to Hino, the company instead wants to use AI primarily as an efficiency tool, including processes such as translating completed 2D illustrations into accurate 3D models rather than allowing generated material to determine the identity of a game.
That distinction is particularly relevant because the presentation featured some of Level-5’s most recognizable franchises. The company recently announced Yo-kai Watch 2: Haunted Domain for Switch 2, a rebuilt version of the 2014 RPG, and later confirmed additional PS5 and PC versions. It also revealed a remake of Professor Layton and the Curious Village, bringing another of its established properties back on modern hardware.
Hino also made clear that Level-5 has no intention of abandoning AI-assisted development entirely. He said the company is experimenting with the technology as part of an effort to improve production efficiency, arguing that automation could allow creative staff to spend more time on work that requires human judgment. One of the studio’s stated ambitions is to reduce development cycles that can currently take around five years to closer to two years.
The CEO nevertheless said Level-5 had learned from the reaction to the VISION presentation and would take that feedback into account for future broadcasts. His statement stopped short of promising that generative AI would never appear anywhere in Level-5’s development pipeline. Instead, the company’s position is that final games should not contain casually generated material and that AI should support, rather than replace, the creative foundations established by its staff.
That approach places Level-5 in the middle of a broader debate across the games industry over how generative AI should be used. Some studios have faced strong criticism after acknowledging AI-assisted production, while others have publicly moved away from the technology. Patrice Désilets, for example, said 1666 : Amsterdam dropped generative AI following backlash surrounding its development process.
For Level-5, the immediate issue is less whether it uses AI at all and more where the company intends to draw the line. Hino’s response confirms that generative tools played a role in creating the recent presentation, but he maintains that story, characters and other identity-defining elements remain human-made. With several major releases and remakes currently in development, future footage will likely face closer scrutiny from players looking to see how consistently the studio follows that distinction.
