Another thing, the title is misleading. It isn't Core first, Casual second in order of priority. It's in order of sequence.
Nintendo will begin by securing the core year 1, and move onto the casual market afterwards. I goes in line with what he said.
The reason:
"Moreover, regrettably, what we prioritised in order to reach out to the new audience was a bit too far from what we prioritised for those who play games as their hobby. Consequently, we presume some people felt that the Wii was not a game system for them or they were not willing to play with the Wii even though some compelling games had been released."
The alienation of the core by over-emphasis on the casual.
The importance of image from the get-go:
"Once consumers have a notion that “this system is not for us,” we have learned that it is extremely difficult to change their perceptions later. Therefore, in promoting the Nintendo 3DS and the Wii U, we have announced that we would like “width” and “depth” to coexist."
Here, he's clearly referring to the hobby gamers when he uses the pronoun "us". So, it's a question of order. He first wants to secure the hobbyists, and avoid alienating them (which they succeeded in with the 3DS). Once that's done, he will go after the casual more aggressively. Mind you he will target the casual from the get-go, just less aggressively at first. That's what he means by evolution.
I like the strategy, and I understand the concerns "Jack of all trades, ace of none". But given the low cost of developing casual games, a constant influx of such games shouldn't be too far fetched. As long as their core outreach doesn't hinder the minimum requirements for casual satisfaction, then the conquest of the core is a go!
