Games · Studio Watch
Level-5 draws a line between internal AI tools and the trailers players see
After criticism of VISION 2026 II, the studio promised corrections and limits on AI in videos shown to players. It still sees a role for AI behind the scenes.
THE TAKEAWAY
Level-5 says it will correct some promotional videos and avoid direct AI use in future videos shown to customers.
Level-5 attributes some disputed images to human choices or mistakes; an unusual frame alone does not establish AI use.
Hino’s earlier “80–90%” coding discussion concerned a misunderstood experiment, not a claim that AI wrote most of Level-5’s games.
A showcase followed by corrections
Level-5’s September 10 VISION presentation introduced updates across its game slate. A week later, the company apologized for problems in the promotional videos, citing both immature AI use and human mistakes. It said some videos would be corrected around Tokyo Game Show.
Its September 17 statement also drew a boundary: AI could help with internal efficiency, but the company would avoid using it directly in videos shown to customers. Level-5 said AI was not used directly in game content.
A disputed image is not the whole game
Level-5 offered specific explanations for images viewers had questioned. Some simplified Yo-kai Watch artwork reflected deliberate drawing choices; other problems were human omissions. It attributed changes to Keita’s face to revised model direction and said Professor Layton and the New World of Steam had not used AI.
The showcase covered several projects, including Layton, Decapolice and Holy Horror Mansion. A strange-looking frame is a reason to ask how that image was made; it cannot tell us how the whole game was produced.
What Hino actually said about code
An earlier development blog helps explain why Level-5 is still interested in AI. Writing in December 2025, CEO Akihiro Hino addressed a misunderstanding that AI was writing 80–90% of the company’s game code. He described one programmer’s experiment on an unreleased AI-themed game, and said the technology had not reached the point of writing that share of a complete game’s code.
Hino described saving time on some tasks and wanting to shorten major-game development. He did not report a measured saving across a shipped game. The “80–90%” figure traveled further than the small experiment behind it.
Why It Matters
A trailer is work the audience can inspect, even when the development process stays private. For a small studio, Level-5’s response is a reason to give promotional assets their own final review. Saving time inside production does not remove the need to check what players will see.
The practical question is simple: who watches the finished trailer closely enough to catch a bad frame before publication? A team can keep experimenting with tools while making somebody responsible for that last pass.
The promise to follow up
Level-5’s Tokyo Game Show schedule ran September 17–21, with playable titles including Layton and Decapolice. Level-5 promised corrections around the event. VEYR has not confirmed whether all of them have appeared.
Future trailers will also show how the new limit works in practice. A policy is easy to announce. The useful follow-up is a corrected piece of work that players can compare for themselves.
