Yes, yes, yes.
That is the best piece of advice in this thread so far, but unfortunately so often ignored.
We could geek out forever about megapixels, crop factors and all the bits and pieces of half a dozen or more different cameras, we could engage in endless fanboy wars, and keep bickering about matters of taste but, all that is irrelevant as long as you have no shooting mileage under your own belt.
I would even use the term "the fact is" instead of "chances are." You won't really know what's actually important to you until you've got some shooting mileage. Furthermore, instead of "in a few years time" I'd say it'll likely happen within the first year, maybe six months, but the cycle will then slow down as one's experience grows. In that light, I'd recommend to go for the model that feels nicest in your own hand, and then go with it.
When it comes to shooting both stills and video with the same gear, there really are no models that do both well. It's always a compromise, a bigger compromise for either one or the other. If you wish to have best of the both worlds, buy two different cameras, one for each task. No matter what the latest hype is out there. That's all the more reason not to go too pricey with the first choice, until you know what (which) is it that you really want to do.
So, with the obvious compromise in mind, I'd say one of the best compromises for both stills and video under $800 category, with the "emphasis slightly on the video side," would be either the G6 or one of the Sony SLT models, like the a58, a65 and sometimes even a77, in some regions.
The more the scale was to tip on the video side, the more obvious the G6 would be, mostly because of the better looking video in general. Although the Sonys aren't too bad when compared to some other dSLR models, they do have slightly more colour artifacts and a little bit of moire, too. But thanks to their hybrid design, they are much nicer compromises for stills&video (with the same camera) than typical dSLR's. Same with the G6, obviously.
But since the two pre-selected choices were Nikon 5x00 and G6, rather than two different models with an EVF, the choice between those two should be pretty simple, IMO.
From those two options I'd go for the Nikon, if my goal was to shoot mostly stills, and only dabble in video occasionally. Personally I wouldn't want to bother with the hassle of shooting video with a typical dSLR in the same price range. Canon or Nikon, doesn't matter. Awkward, clumsy and uncomfortable, with no real quality benefits, either. But for stills and action stills shooting they're pretty ok.
On the other hand, if the emphasis was clearly more on the video side of things as suggested in the opening comment, from those two I'd go for the G6. If you can't get the Nikon idea off your head, buy a Metabones N->mFT Speed Booster, too.
But all in all, you shouldn't really listen to any of us too much. You should just go for either/any camera, because as mentioned on the top of this comment, as a beginner you don't really know what you need or want yet, and that will most likely change along the way, as your experience grows.
But as long as you don't have any camera, you won't get any shooting mileage and thus personal knowledge, and you'll be stuck in an endless loop of GAS and futile online debates forever. Doing research online will only help you to a certain point. After that, you just have to pick a tool, and then get up off your derrier and start shooting. Just go and pick one that fancies you the most. It doesn't matter if it's Panasonic, Nikon or some other brand, as long as you like it. Then just shoot, shoot shoot.