The Xbox 360 had a year’s head start on its competition in the seventh generation console war, and that served Microsoft well. We all know a year is just too damn long for a serious gamer to wait, and they certainly gained market share because of it, at least in Europe and North America. But now that the shiny new consoles are out, is the 360 starting to look a bit shabby?

To start with, it has to be said that all three consoles - the 360, the PS2, and Nintendo’s Wii - have their dedicated fanbois who won’t change their minds for anything, even fact. These diehard fans do matter, simply because their spend on gaming is probably worth a fair few families of casual gamers. And all these consoles obviously and significantly outperform their predecessors. None of them blow.

The Xbox 360 and the PS3 are the easiest consoles to do a straight comparison with. They both function as more than a game console - they play DVDs and music, they display photos, they connect with the internet, they allow chat. Sony will be in trouble if blu-ray loses the high-density DVD battle with HD-DVD. Microsoft also has an edge with their online content, having built up a sizeable and frequently-updated stock in the last year. They’re now providing movies for download through Xbox Live’s Marketplace. Sony may well catch up, but for now, Microsoft still has an edge.

Putting aside what’s inside the box for a moment and looking at how the two consoles do perform instead of how they should, the PS3 really isn’t a year ahead of the 360. Side by side comparisons of cross-platform games favour the 360, which has better lighting effects and less of a tendency to flatten and blur textures. Despite this, the PS3 still has longer loading times.

The 360 is well and truly a Microsoft product, however. Getting something out quickly isn’t the best way to ensure reliability, and a small but significant number of the initial release of consoles crashed to ‘blue screen of death’. Also, the recent Fall Update, which Xbox Live users were required to download to access the service, caused about one percent of consoles to brick.

The PS3 also has the Sixaxis controller, the half-assed last-minute response to the wiimote. While you can tilt the controller to affect your movement in games like Tony Hawk, you get better control from using the conventional d-pad. Comparing the Sixaxis with the wiimote is an object lesson in the difference between a gimmick and an innovation.

So to the Wii. Bad points first. It doesn’t support HD-TV display, and it doesn’t play DVDs. It’s a game console and that’s that. It’s not, generally, as graphically impressive as its competition. The wireless controllers run on batteries rather than being rechargeable. AA batteries.

But. Wow. Nintendo have made an impressive play for the family and non-gaming market with the wiimote, and yet hardened gamers are still slathering at the chance to get their hands on one and try it, because it’s different. Even while being different, Nintendo are also better at being the same - the Wii is backwards compatible with more old console games than either the PS3 or the Xbox 360, which is particularly appalling at this, offering software emulation for a blinding 30% of Xbox games. W00t.

It’s a hard call to make, which console is ‘best’. But if the question is, will the Xbox sink without a trace next to its shinier cousins, the answer is no. If you’re looking at serious, Mature-rated gaming with lots of online content, you could flip a coin between the PS3 and the Xbox 360, and then go with whatever you had before, Sony or Microsoft. But if you’re looking for family gaming, or something to play while having a few cold ones with a bunch of mates, then the Wii might just be your new best friend.