It may be best to understand Nintendo’s stance regarding generative AI straight from the source.
Furukawa in 2024: “we recognize that it may also raise issues with intellectual property rights. […] we will work to continue delivering value that […] cannot be created by technology alone.”

Miyamoto in 2024: “There is a lot of talk about A.I., […] everyone starts to go in the same direction, but that is where Nintendo would rather go in a different direction.”

Nintendo reaffirmed the position when New York Times asked them to comment on a pseudo-intellectual AI puff piece in 2025.

It’s also instructive to revisit Furukawa’s statement on metaverse in 2022: “there is no easy way to define specifically what kinds of surprises and enjoyment the metaverse can deliver to our consumers. […] we do not think that is the situation at the present time.”

Nintendo’s management philosophy and corporate policy are fairly consistent, unwavering even. They are only “baffling and nonsensical” when observers insist on using industry norms—which are nothing more than trends and precedents—as a measuring stick. (This is not a dig.)
![Bluesky post by [redacted]:
Nintendo's business decisions are weird because they are either completely baffling and nonsensical or they're the only company in the industry with the correct take and there's no in-between](https://ninpatentswatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/bafkreibrrzhaz3regkznzoxoayb2nhpjfysg7nnxwsd6iiuy46aht2s22q.jpg)
The company also has the luxury of a supportive and patient shareholder base, allowing them to continue on their own path. E.g., despite the calls from financial analysts and foreign funds to increase dividend payouts, domestic retail investors largely sided with the management.

[Originally posted on 2025-10-04 Pacific Time]