Even people utterly uninterested in videogames know by now that two new game machines have arrived this month to lure holiday shopping dollars out of consumers’ wallets. One is the long-anticipated PlayStation 3 from the videogame leader, Sony Corp. The other is the more obscure Wii, from the videogame pioneer, Nintendo Co. Both are going up against the year-old Xbox 360 from Microsoft Corp.

Like the Xbox, the PS3 and the Wii bear little resemblance to the toylike game consoles of the 1980s and 1990s. They are powerful computers that have been optimized for graphics and sound. And, like the Xbox, the two new contenders can handle multimedia and can connect to the Internet.

We’ve been testing the two newcomers, with help from four volunteers, three men and a woman, all in their 20s, most of whom have extensive game-playing experience. We tried a selection of games for each.

Sony’s PlayStation 3 (left) and Nintendo’s Wii (right).

These two new game machines couldn’t be more different. The PlayStation 3 is a bulky, shiny black box that costs $600, or $500 for a somewhat stripped-down model. That’s up to $200 more than the Xbox 360, and about what you’d spend on a basic Windows computer. The PS3 includes a hard disk, a networking port, Wi-Fi wireless networking, and playback of DVDs and CDs. It produces high-definition video. In fact, the PS3 can also play a next-generation, high-definition movie disk, called Blu-ray.

The Wii is a small, thin white box that costs just $250 and has much wimpier specs than the Sony. It does have Wi-Fi, but it lacks a hard disk, a networking port, and the ability to play DVDs or CDs, let alone Blu-ray disks. It cannot produce high-definition video. It has fewer ports and connectors.

Yet, in our tests, we found the more modest Wii to be the more exciting, fun and satisfying of the two new game machines. We and our four volunteer testers were impressed by the rich, realistic graphics and intricate game play in some of the half-dozen PS3 games we tried. By contrast, we all agreed that the graphics on the Wii ranged from dated to cheesy.

But the Wii won our hearts for one reason: It uses a wireless controller that can detect your arm and hand motions and transfer them to the screen, so that you can physically control the action. This opens up huge possibilities. In sports games, you can actually swing a baseball bat or tennis racket or golf club. In adventure games, you can slash a sword through the air or throw a punch. You make pretty much the same motions, using your full arm and hand, that you’d make with the real objects.

With the Wii, you don’t sit on the couch and just press buttons. You typically stand. You get a workout. In fact the Wii controller, a slim rectangular gadget that looks like a TV remote control, has a wrist strap to prevent it from being hurled across the room while you are, say, serving in tennis. The controller also has a small built-in speaker and it transmits vibrations to make the play more realistic. There are already reports of people complaining of sore elbows and wrists from hours of Wii play. Our testers were initially amazed that they felt a little winded and sore after hours in front of the Wii.

To show off these capabilities, every Wii comes with a free disk called Wii Sports that includes simple, basic sports games — tennis, baseball, golf, bowling, and boxing. These aren’t fully realized games; they are more like demonstrations. The graphics are crude and the games lack multiple levels of difficulty. But they are terrific fun. One of our testers, a college athlete who is bored by standard videogames, said they gave her the first opportunity ever to feel successful at a videogame.

We assume some clever game developer can produce more sophisticated versions of these sports games, and of other types of games that make full use of the Wii controller. There are also likely to be specialized controllers that can take advantage of the Wii’s motion sensitivity.

The PS3’s controller, which resembles the one on the previous-generation PlayStation 2, also has some motion sensitivity. But it seems much more limited, and the controller doesn’t vibrate.

The two products are clearly aimed at different audiences. While the PS3 has a lot of multimedia features, it is really for hard-core gamers with deep pockets (or with parents with deep pockets) — the folks who spend days mastering all the levels and secrets of a complex game.

The Wii is for casual game players, including younger kids and older adults who find the complexity and finger skills required for the PlayStation and Xbox to be intimidating. Even adventure games and racing games on the Wii seem easier to get into than similar titles on the PS3.

Left: Two people seen standing while they use the Nintendo Wii’s motion-sensor remotes to play games. Right: Screen views of a Wii tennis match show on-screen players mimicking motions of the wireless controllers.

In addition to Wii Sports, we tested and enjoyed two other Wii titles — “The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess,” an adventure game; and “Excite Truck,” a driving game. In the former, the controller can be swung like a sword. In the latter, you can move it to steer. We also ran a simple slideshow on the Wii by inserting a memory card from a digital camera.

The Wii can also play a selection of older Nintendo games, such as Super Mario and Donkey Kong. You have to buy and download these from the online Wii shop. But we were disappointed that they require the purchase of an extra, old-style controller, which we couldn’t find in either of our local Best Buy or Circuit City stores.

The Wii also has a fun system for creating avatars you can use to represent yourself in various games. They are called “Miis” and you can assign them a wide range of facial features.

The PS3 has some impressive features. All six of us were blown away by the graphics on PS3 titles like “Genji: Days of the Blade,” an action-adventure game set in old Japan; and “Ridge Racer 7,” a car-racing game. We enjoyed the skateboarding game “Tony Hawk’s Project 8,” including the use of the PlayStation controller’s limited-motion sensitivity — though the graphics in that game were much cruder than in the other two.

We also were impressed by the photo slideshow feature on the PS3, which turned photos on a camera memory card we inserted into sharp, vibrant images of snapshot prints fluttering on the screen.

We also watched a high-definition movie on a Blu-ray disk and thought it looked and sounded good.

But none of us felt that the game graphics, or the Blu-ray movie playback, were superior enough to the Xbox 360’s graphics and DVD playback, to justify the PS3’s heftier price. None of our four volunteer testers said they’d buy the PS3 at $600. (The $500 model of the PS3 seemed a bad bargain because it lacks Wi-Fi, which is needed in most homes to connect to the Internet for online game playing.)

In fact, the PS3’s graphics, while better in some cases than what we’d seen on the Xbox, weren’t knock-your-socks-off better. And, to really get the most out of a PS3, especially its Blu-ray disk feature, you need a high-definition TV.

In addition, there were some annoying lapses on the PS3. Setup was long and complicated. Load times for games and for levels within games were slow. Typing is tedious, using an onscreen representation of a cellphone keypad (though you can attach a computer keyboard if you have one.) Just registering for the Internet features seemed to take an eternity.

Plus, the PS3’s wireless controller was a pain. In our tests, it often ran out of juice and had to be plugged in to be recharged. Once plugged in, we were always accidentally disconnecting it, because the cable was too short.

Speaking of cables, they may cost you a bundle on a PS3. It comes with a new-style high-definition connector, called an HDMI jack, that provides the best video on a high-definition TV. But it lacks an HDMI cable, an accessory that can easily cost $100.

For mainstream users, who lack the skill or patience or interest for complex videogames, the Wii is the way to go. For hard-core gamers, the PS3 will be the one you want, but only if you are willing to part with a lot of money.

Write to MossbergSolution@wsj.com

Long after the Christmas trees have been taken down and the menorahs packed away, that television set you purchased as a holiday gift will still be around, looming over your family room for years. It’s likely to long outlast all those iPods and digital cameras and game consoles flying off the store shelves right now. So you want to get the right TV set this time around. Do-overs are expensive if you don’t.

Unfortunately, shopping for a television set is much, much harder than it used to be. The TV aisles in your local electronics store are like exotic galleries packed with confusing acronyms — LCD, HDTV, DLP — and staffed by clerks who often are either clueless, or so geeky, that they can’t help much. This is not a great situation when you’re spending thousands of dollars on a TV, not the hundreds people used to spend.

So, here’s a rough, quick guide to buying a television this holiday season. Our aim is to provide a very basic cheat sheet so you can at least wade through the basics and talk to the salespeople intelligently. For greater detail, we suggest buying one of those glossy magazines that covers new TVs in depth. Even if you don’t actually purchase the set at a store and instead opt to buy it online, we suggest visiting the store to see the TV so that you can judge its performance in person.

There are two basic types of big-screen TVs — flat panels, where much of the technology that creates the image is actually embedded in the glass screen itself; and projection sets, also called microdisplay sets, where the front screen is just a sheet of plastic and the key technology that creates the image is in the back of the set.

42\” Samsung HP-R4252 Plasma TV. Price: $3,499.99. For more info: www.samsung.com.

Within these two broad categories, competing technologies are slugging it out. There are two main types of flat-panel sets — LCD and plasma — and three main types of projection sets. Most new TVs are “digital,” meaning they can deal directly with the computerlike signals produced by newer TV transmissions. Older sets are considered “analog,” and were designed for older TV transmissions. Digital sets can display analog TV signals, but not always very well. All U.S. TV transmissions are due to convert to digital signals in the next few years.

HDTV versus ED and SD

Many big-screen TVs are capable of receiving high-definition television signals, or HDTV — the most detailed, and best-looking, television available. But some cheaper digital models can only display lesser-quality pictures called Enhanced Definition, or ED. Others are stuck at standard definition, or SD, which is even worse.

So, just because you have a big-screen, digital TV, that doesn’t mean it’s an HDTV. Make sure any set you choose can handle HD signals. Also, many HD sets don’t actually contain an HD receiver, or tuner — the component that actually pulls in the HD programming. They are merely “HD-ready,” meaning they can display HDTV if you connect them to an HD receiver, like a cable or satellite set-top box that is able to receive HD signals. Others have an HD receiver built in, though it’s usually limited to over-the-air HD broadcasts, which require an antenna, and can’t pick up cable or satellite transmissions.

Flat Panel Screens — LCD and Plasma

LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) and plasma screens allow for large TVs that are very thin. If aesthetics are your biggest concern and you’re interested in buying a TV that can be attached to a wall, you should buy one of these two types of screens. They also offer some of the best-quality pictures available.

The actual technology in these two screens is quite different. LCD TVs are like the screens on laptops or flat-panel computer monitors. They work by passing current through tiny liquid crystals. Plasma TVs work by stimulating a captive gas with an electrical charge.

45\” Sharp AQUOS LCD TV, LC-GD7U. Price: $5,499.99. For more info: www.sharpusa.com

Both technologies are rapidly becoming cheaper, but they are still mainly distinguished by how much they cost at certain sizes. LCD TVs are a bit thinner and much lighter than plasmas, but, at large-screen sizes, they are prohibitively expensive. By contrast, plasmas aren’t efficient to make at small-screen sizes.

So, for people with typical budgets this holiday season, the only affordable flat-panel TVs today more than 40 inches in size will almost certainly be plasmas. Buyers of flat-panel TVs under 40 inches will very likely wind up with an LCD.

In general, both technologies deliver vivid, intense pictures. There are differences, but these have been narrowing, as the competition drives improvements in both camps. For instance, plasmas were long superior in viewing angle — the ability to see the picture well from the side — but some LCDs have caught up and even passed plasmas on this score.

Early plasmas had a risk of “burn-in,” a situation where a logo or fixed text might remain visible even after you change channels. But this has been almost eliminated in new sets. Early LCDs showed ghosting during fast-action shots, but, again, this has been greatly eased in newer sets.

TV geeks will see differences among the two technologies in areas such as contrast, color saturation and brightness. But these things vary among manufacturers and models, and most viewers won’t notice fine distinctions. The best way to choose is to go to a store and compare with your own eyes, without worrying about techie jargon.

These two types of TVs will definitely set you back; LCDs come in prices ranging from $450 for 13 inches to $5,500 for 46-inchers to $21,000 for a 65-inch set. Plasmas go for about $2,200 for a 42-inch set and $12,000 for a 63-inch plasma screen. Yes, we’re still just talking about televisions here.

Projection TVs

If you’re shocked by the prices of the LCD and plasma sets, you might find projection televisions a little more your speed. They tend to cost less than the flat-panel models, but still deliver a handsome picture.

These sets aren’t nearly as thin as the flat panels, because they need depth internally to project the image they create in the back of the set. But if you don’t mind sacrificing aesthetics, you’ll find some good options in this grouping.

Projection TVs can be divided into three main categories: CRT (cathode ray tube) rear projection; LCD rear projection; and DLP (Digital Light Projection) rear projection. The first two are also called “microdisplays,” because they use tiny display chips to create the image in the rear of the set.

50\” Samsung HL-R5087W DLP Rear Projection TV. Price: $3,699.99. For more info: www.samsung.com.

CRT sets use the oldest and least advanced of the projection technologies, though they still offer good color and sharp pictures. Their screens range from about 42 to 65 inches, but their cabinets are notably deeper than the other types of projection sets, taking up a lot of space. They are, however, the least expensive of the projection TVs, costing about $1,800 for a 51-inch CRT.

LCD rear projection uses a rather slim cabinet; for example, a 55-inch screen only has a 20-inch deep cabinet. They range in size from about 42 to 62 inches. These sets use tiny LCD screens and project the picture they create onto the large, front screen. A 55-inch LCD rear-projection set will run you about $3,000.

DLP rear projection comes in screens measuring 42 inches and up while still boasting relatively shallow cabinet sizes. For example, a 61-inch DLP can have a cabinet of 19 inches. This technology uses a chip packed with tiny mirrors to create and project a TV picture. It generally costs more than a CRT, but is still less expensive than a plasma or flat-panel LCD TV. The images produced on a DLP are noted for their sharp blacks and grayscales. We found a 50-inch DLP for $2,200.

More Confusion

Like computers and cellphones, digital TVs are improving rapidly, so that a cheap model on sale may use last year’s technology. Also, some regular old analog TV sets are being touted as “flat screen,” because they use a flat piece of glass to encase old technology. But they are not “flat-panel.”

The connectors on all these TVs can be horribly confusing. But you may want to get two new types of connectors — HDMI, which supposedly simplifies connecting components without any loss of quality; and CableCard, which allows you to get some, but not all, cable networks without a bulky set-top box.

Our best advice is to shop around, and to buy the set that matches your budget and looks good to you in the store. All the jargon and expert opinions in the world matter less than your own taste.

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com