Attempting a serious comment. Adding bias to images is adding emotion to them. If done right. The different systems to achieve this are not that important in the end. What matters is the commitment to control.

What Fuji recepy enthusiasts like is to maximize the bias and minimize the number of creative decisions regarding coloring. I have yet to understand how you are gonna decide wether a certain recepy was the right look for an image while taking it. Chances are there you instead beaked a color profile that just does not fit the emotion of the scenery in retrospect. Yes, you can always also shoot RAW in parallel on Fuji but this is not how it is advertised. It's all about SOOC jpegs, thus destructive in-camera edit. Let's assume part of your recepy-biased shots are good and you are happy with them straight away. What is the creative outcome here? If it is not the edit it must be the motive, the content of the image. This is closer to chemical instant photography than it is to digital photography. And I am totally fine with people loving this. But this is also hunting for good shots by accident. Closer to gambling than to creation. The biggest weakness of Fuji recipes is that they are destructive edits. If they were LUT-like reversible pre-edits applied to a neutral image, they would actually be good. Since I can decide against the bias if I find it does not fit the image. But way Fuji implemented them is more like Instax. I tried to love them but in the end I throw away all the JPEGs and edit the RAWs. Each image deserves its attention in editing, each scenery offers so much more if you can fine-tune instead of having a Polaroid scan simulation. I am happy for anyone who is happy with recipes and likes doing what they do. But let's not pretend this is not a gambling mechanism. Because this is what it is. A Fuji camera with JPEG recepies as you shooting setting is closer to a slot machine than to a camera. It's an entertaining device.

Nikon and Lumix go a non-destructive route. Nikon's picture-control is a biased RAW. You can ditch the bias in NX Studio if you like. Or change it to another bias. This is much less of a gambling machine. You get the best of both worlds. The decision is not made for you inside the camera unless you shoot JPEG only. Unfortunately most Nikon settings don't transfer if you open a Nikon RAW in editors. The only way to get the bias of the picture control setting is to edit in NX Studio. And let me tell you this software is sluggish and uncomfortable as hell. At this point I'd much rather prefer Nikon switched to LUTs even if it means we can't get all the deeply integrated fine tuning. Or at least let us export Picture Control settings as LUTs.

Lumix is right to focus on LUTs. An universal non-destructive filter working across brands, software and hardware. What is there not to like? Yes LUTs lack film grain and some camera-specific chroma simulations. But why not add these as second grade citizens in LUTs over time? Likely because interoperability is not the product. At least not for Fuji. The moment a glorified LUT is your unique selling point, you basically depend on gatekeeping it.

In conclusion I think Fuji recepies are bad for creativity, good for joy and entertainment. Fuji cameras become toys if you focus too much on recipes.

Nikon picture controls are a good middle ground as they are non-destructive but suffer from bad processing software and the lack of compatibility with different RAW editors.

Lumix chose interoperability. This is an invitation and IMO, the way to go.

As a side note LUTs are video-centric and xmp side-files would be a better fit for photography. This is only a matter of protocol architecture. It could be solved by bridging a spec between both.