Old houses tend to have larger rooms with higher ceilings and they often have somewhat attractive architectural features. Buildings from before WW1 are built using hideous amounts of material in the outer walls, something often described as "well built".
We live in a Victorian building which, yes, has all the above features and moreover has a generous garden. However, I would dispute the well built notion because when we bought it the windows and roof were horrendously draughty, there was no insulation anywhere and no heating either (I don't count open fireplaces in every room where any heat was sucked out to the outdoors through the chimneys). We have changed all the windows (thermally preferenced wide double glazing), re-slated with membrane, insulated thoroughly overhead, insulated outer walls so far as practicable, installed solar space and water heating plus biomass heating.....and the place is now inhabitable and in fact not bad, it has taken a lot of time, effort and expense. I would not want to start again on the same elsewhere nor would I like to live in an old house with all the disadvantages they normally come with, particularly the hopeless thermal leaks (I will not accept freezing in my own home).
Genuinely well built modern houses with spacious feel are available, especially detached ones but, although the latest houses are well insulated, there is far too much corner cutting and poor supervision. The common perception that new houses are shoddily built is too often fully justified/deserved.
To sum up, either way, unless you are prepared to put right the unacceptable aspects, you are likely to be to some extent dissatisfied with either option.