Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by fnevaeva (541 posts) -

Which series should I read first? I can't decide. I'm tempted to read just the first book of each series to see which one is better and move on from there. Help?

#2 Edited by ferrari2001 (16969 posts) -

They are completely different books. I couldn't say which one is inherently better. However The Lord of the Rings has basically defined the modern fantasy genre. Tolkien is very much a genius at what he does and you certainly can't go wrong with Tolkien. George R.R. Martin on the other hand has a lot more modern writing style. He isn't as concerned with language as Tolkien was, but he does write and awesome story and characters.

#3 Edited by fnevaeva (541 posts) -

I think i'm gonna go for Game of Thrones. I wanna catch up to book 3 before season 3 comes out on blu-ray and then maybe i'll read the LOTR in the meantime til season 4 comes out. Cause they've already made the LOTR movie trilogy.

#4 Posted by chessmaster1989 (29381 posts) -

Lord of the Rings is better, plus you don't have to wait 10,000 years before the last book comes out.

#5 Posted by SaintLeonidas (26342 posts) -

I much prefer Game of Thrones. The writing itself isn't as good, but I enjoy the characters, their relationships and just the overall history of the story much more.

#6 Edited by Barbariser (6724 posts) -

I wasn't able to finish either of them because they're both so tedious. GoT is much longer but slightly easier to read, but it's also about 95% composed of rape, incest, murders, backstabbings and characters that are either mindbogglingly unintelligent or unbelievably dickish. LoTR has a much more interesting backstory and is far more inspiring emotionally as it's a tale of friendship and courage overcoming all odds while I'm not sure exactly what GoT's theme is except maybe "medieval English people are massive assholes". Or at least that's what I got out of the first book, from what I've heard all the sequels are even worse.

ThemeRuneScape Wiki: Theme is a tra

#7 Posted by darktruth007 (509 posts) -

I wasn't particularly impressed with either when I tried to read their first entries so my vote is neither. I find Lotr is too longwinded, full of cliches and rather dull. GoT to me is more of an acquired taste, but it wouldn't be my first recommendation for entry-level fantasy readers.

I would recommend either the Sword of Truth or Riftwar Cycle series of books.

#8 Posted by Flubbbs (3142 posts) -

LOTR

#9 Posted by cain006 (8625 posts) -

@darktruth007 said:

I wasn't particularly impressed with either when I tried to read their first entries so my vote is neither. I find Lotr is too longwinded, full of cliches and rather dull. GoT to me is more of an acquired taste, but it wouldn't be my first recommendation for entry-level fantasy readers.

I would recommend either the Sword of Truth or Riftwar Cycle series of books.

Well LOTR basically invented those cliches so you can't really knock it for that.

And the sword of truth series is awful. The author is a moronic follower of Ayn Rand and the main character fucking slaughters a group of peaceful protesters and says that he's justified in doing so.

I haven't read LOTR but I've seen the movies. I think both series are good but I would take song of ice and fire over it.

#10 Edited by Serraph105 (28147 posts) -

To me Lord of the Rings is the best series of books ever so I'm a bit biased on that front. I'm currently reading A Game of Thrones though and I'm quite impressed with it. Just like I enjoy politics in real life I rather love the politics of being and remaining king in this series. It's definitely something that Lord of the Rings largely ignored.

#11 Posted by PannicAtack (21037 posts) -

Game of Thrones isn't the book series, fyi. It's A Song of Ice and Fire. A Game of Thrones is the first book in the series, and Game of Thrones is the name of the tv show.

#12 Posted by johnd13 (8219 posts) -

I read the LOTR books when I was quite young so I can't really express a valid opinion although I do know that they are paramount for the genre and all fans of it(well I should say everyone) must read them. I'm currently reading the a Song of Ice and Fire novels and I'm really hooked. If you like fantasy you'll be fully immersed in its plot and world. So I say begin with the latter but make sure to read LOTR as well at some point.

#13 Posted by LaytonsCat (3652 posts) -

A Song of Ice and Fire. A Storm of Swords and A Clash of Kings are perfection. The quality definitely drops in books 3+4 but by that point your too into the story to care

#14 Posted by cain006 (8625 posts) -

@LaytonsCat said:

A Song of Ice and Fire. A Storm of Swords and A Clash of Kings are perfection. The quality definitely drops in books 3+4 but by that point your too into the story to care

...Storm of Swords is the third book.

#15 Posted by LoG-Sacrament (20397 posts) -

i don't know which series i'd call better simply because a song of ice and fire hasn't been finished yet.

beyond that, you just have 2 authors with very different sensibilities. tolkien was decidedly christian and, despite his (ironic) disapproval of allegory, you can certainly see the influence in his work. more than that, tolkien's storytelling is much more tightly composed than martin's. another really big difference is their openness to adventure and the outdoors. tolkien sees the beauty of the outdoors and potentially life affirming effects of an arduous journey while martin sees such a combination as simply a lack of amenities (i'm not saying one viewpoint is necessarily better as not focusing on the difficulties of martin's characters could easily get condescending).

if you do decide to read LotR at some point, i'd recommend reading the hobbit first. yeah, it does introduce you more to characters if you have no knowledge of them, but i'd recommend the hobbit more as a way of setting the mood for the big changes that happen in Rings.

#16 Posted by th3warr1or (20640 posts) -

LOTR.

GoT isn't even in the same league as LOTR.

#17 Posted by Makhaidos (1614 posts) -

I'd base this on what you prefer to study about history.

If you like World War II, go with Lord of the Rings.

If you like medieval English history (specifically pertaining to the War of the Roses), go with A Song of Ice and Fire.

Comparing the two to see which is better is like comparing apples to spike-studded, incestuous oranges.

#18 Edited by Tqricardinho (341 posts) -

LORD of the books. I mean rings.

#19 Posted by redstorm72 (4587 posts) -

I enjoy both. A Song of ice and Fire I find is easier to read and the constant switching between perspectives/cliff hangers really hooked me. Plus, the world is probably a little more intricate, the characters a little deeper, and an overall more realistic vibe. Lord of the Rings on the other hand I found the overall story far more epic and enjoyable. LOTR also makes far better use of its "fantasy" aspect (ex. LOTR: Wizards and Evil Eyes and Ring Wraiths and Trolls! GoT: Uhhh, well, there are these scary snow zombies, but I haven't seen them in a while, also, we totally have some baby dragons... who haven't done anything).

I guess if I had to choose, I would lean towards Lord of the Rings, mainly because the movies were epic as all get out, and books 4 and 5 of A Song of Ice and Fire are so weak.

#20 Edited by GamingTitan (547 posts) -

Pffft.....lord of the rings

#21 Posted by Chutebox (37356 posts) -

I prefer ASoFaI over LotR, but I'd read LotR first. Less books and much smaller, so you'd be done faster.

#22 Posted by Flubbbs (3142 posts) -

new sneak peak trailer that just came out yesterday!!!! smaug sounds amazing!

#23 Posted by dodgerblue13 (20836 posts) -

If it helps, watching Game of Thrones made me want to read the books. I read the first two and decided that the show is much better and that it was worth watching a unique television experience and then later reading about an interesting world sidetracked by superfluous characters and a messy point-of-view narration. The narration actually felt refreshing to me at the start, but Martin includes too many characters than are necessary, making the whole story far more enjoyable through television.

Watching The Lord of the Rings made me want to read the books. I read The Lord of the Rings and then The Hobbit. Then I got the Silmarillion and Children of Hurin. I haven't read those two yet, but I think it's indicative of my enjoyment.

Overall, I'd rank them like this:

The Lord of the Rings (movies) > Game of Thrones (show) > The Hobbit (book) > The Lord of the Rings (books) >>> A Song of Ice and Fire (but I've only read the first two and am waiting to fall behind from the show)

#24 Posted by LexLas (4265 posts) -

Cannot even begin to compare the two. These are completely different.