That depends on whether you want to support the developers and designers at Nintendo, or the Corporate Bigwigs, and whether wanting to support one but not the other means you're willing to support both, or neither.
Nintendo bigwigs... Yeah, they're assholes. They don't keep up with the times and modern trends, they run on nostalgia machine, target their products mostly to kids, despite having a sizable audience who is now in their 20s-30s who grew up with Nintendo, and shut down anyone trying to talk about the company. They don't listen to consumers, and seem to just be very private and recluse.
Of course, this isn't all coming from a bad place. Back in the day this is what made Nintendo great. Their management maintained true quality control, and control in general, over their platform, and guaranteed an experience you could enjoy, rather than the experiences that had crashed the videogame market. Now though? They need to change their approach a little. Not a complete 180, but the advent of the internet has changed a great many things in the games community, and they need to keep up.
The devs though? The devs are, honestly, pretty good. They do focus on delivering quality products. Maybe you don't enjoy them, but it is hard to deny that the products are usually highly polished, mechanically sound, and a complete game, even at launch. Compare to many games these days, that come out buggy, unfinished, unpolished, and often with mechanics that don't always entirely flow. Whether you prefer RPG gameplay like in Dragon Age, or shooter gameplay like Battlefield - Nintendo's games at least come out more polished, even if their style isn't your thing.
Additionally, the devs do the best to innovate with what they have. They don't create new IPs very often, but within an IP games can be drastically different, while still having the same soul. Super Mario 64 vs Super Mario Galaxy vs Super Mario in general. All rather different games. Zelda; Ocarina of Time vs Zelda; Phantom Hourglass vs Zelda; A Link Between Worlds. They do things substantially differently to each other. Sometimes its a hit. Sometimes its a miss. They take those risks fairly often though, and try to shake up old IPs - which is admirable, even if we'd prefer they made similar games with their old IPs, and made new IPs for new game styles. Of course big wig management probably doesn't allow this.
On the engineering side, they're also always trying something new. Whether you liked the Wii's controls, or the WiiUs double screen, or the DS's dual screen with touch pad... Its all different from what the market is doing at the time. The Wii tried motion controls, had a few fairly successful games that made good use of them, though not a lot for the core gamer demographic, and started a trend that brought them back in general. The 3DS and WiiU add substantial usability upgrades to several games, when used correctly, even if they are larger and bulkier and not always what one wants to use. The ability to have a map, inventory, and other menus open, and to be able to look at and fuck around with them while playing the game, greatly improves the flow of the game, and led to novel concepts such as drawing the Boomerang or Bombchu path on screen in the DS Zelda titles. All these innovations have also had their flops, their downsides, and their problems - but at least it is something different being done.
Honestly, I'd wait to see if the New Zelda seems to innovate in the way you want, and if it does buy it to support that innovation, if it doesn't than don't buy it to let them know that innovation wasn't desired. While on the corporate side they need some work, the company does also have its positive sides. No company is ever going to be perfect, and if you wanted great corporate practices towards gamers from your company before buying their games, you just wouldn't buy games. What matters is whether what Nintendo offers interests you or not, and whether you think its worth the asking price. If you're not sure, wait for more information then see.
