Sci-fi and Heroic Fantasy discussion

Glad you enjoyed them, but I didn't like either of the series and never got past the first books of each :)

I really liked the first 3 books of A Song of Ice & Fire, but thought the last couple were far too wordy, so it isn't surprising that I couldn't get into Jordan's books at all. My wife liked both series. I think she preferred Jordan's since she's read it several times.

I can't really compare the two because I haven't read A Song of Ice & Fire - based on everything I've read about it and the show, I believe it would be too dark and grim for me. I don't mind a level of violence/reality etc, but I can't deal with relentless violence and grimdark is my least favourite sub-genre of fantasy

But I have read Wheel of Time (currently on my second full re-read). I quite enjoy it - it's epic good vs evil fantasy in every sense. I love it's intricate intrigue even if it does get ridiculously convoluted at times (and I make good use of the wiki page to keep track of who all the characters are). I like the magic system. It's got main characters you can barrack for and I like most of the main characters and it's got characters that I love to hate (Liandrian, the Seanchan Empire as a whole, Elaida). It does get quite slow from book 5 till about book 11 - on my first attempt at the series I gave up at about book 8, but I re-tried it and am glad I did. It's one of my feel-good fantasy series.

Wheel of Time.

In addition to the obvious advantage of completeness, even if you'd asked me during the post-Jordan interregnum, I'd have answered the same. For my taste, Wheel of Time is set in a world that's more different from our own. It has not just a "feel" of deeper history but a history that keeps inserting itself into the present-day story as well.

WoT has more pervasive magic — not quite commonplace, but Channeling isn't exactly rare, plus places such as The Ways, Rhuidean, and Tel'aran'rhiod.

WoT's storytelling also relies more on a sense of mystery, about strange prophecies of multiple varieties (from ancient legends to Min's more immediate readings, to the divinations in Rhuidean) and legendary people.

A Song of Ice and Fire derives more of its mystery from who's going to betray who next, who is going to die next, whereas WoT combine some of that with trying to figure out who's who, what's what, and what the heck does that prophecy mean?

Of course, ASoIaF does have actual Dragons.

By the way: Memory of Light / Wheel of Time discussion

How come Wheel of Time & A Song of Ice and Fire seem to be the two series fen are always trying to compare?

Why doesn't anyone ever ask, Song of Ice and Fire or Lord of the Rings? Wheel of Time or Earthsea? Earthsea or Lord of the Rings? The First Law or Farseer? Kingkiller or Dagger & Coin? Paksenarrion or Black Company? Lyonesse or Shadowmarch? Powdermage or Shadow Campaign? Mistborn or Stormlight? Shannara or Discworld?

The thickness of the books? :)

Andrea wrote: "The thickness of the books? :)"

Good point. In an average lifetime, one only has time to read one or the other, so one must choose wisely.

G33z3r wrote: "How come Wheel of Time & A Song of Ice and Fire seem to be the two series fen are always trying to compare?

Why doesn't anyone ever ask, Song of Ice and Fire or Lord of the Rings? Wheel of Time or..."
Marketing. Publishers have made these two series tent poles for the whole genre. It pains me to read comparisons of books to A Song of Ice and Fire when they clearly have very little in common. I loath the book series by Martin; it's wordy, and a medieval soap opera. Jordan's Wheel of Time it lengthy too, and I really have to agree on what you said about it above. It is the better of the two.

Though if thickness is a factor, what about Steven Erikson's books?

Richard wrote: "It pains me to read comparisons of books to A Song of Ice and Fire when they clearly have very little in common...."

Yeah, that's true. I'm currently reading The Shadow of What Was Lost, whose blurb promises, "Will appeal not only to The Wheel of Time readers,...". And I remember last year SyFy was promoting The Expanse as "Game of Thrones in Space!"

I actually got through the first book of the Song of Ice and Fire, so my vote is for that.

The Eye of the World was easily one of the worst books i've ever read. Painful dialogue, scenes that dragged forever, laughably-named villains, glacial pacing. Abandoned it at the 60% mark.

The actual best series in fantasy is Discworld, by the way.

both, absolutely.
but still apples and oranges in comparison

Erikson's books should be considered. I imagine that they are hard to swallow for the casual reader though. It is a massive work. Especially if you include his prequel Trilogy or Ian C. Esslemont's works in the Malazan world.

Brendan wrote: "I actually got through the first book of the Song of Ice and Fire, so my vote is for that.

The Eye of the World was easily one of the worst books i've ever read. Painful dialogue, sc..."

I agree to the glacial pacing and scenes that dragged forever. The series would have been more accessible if it had been pruned down. Epic fantasy from it's heyday.

In my humble (and, disclaimer, pretentious) opinion, I don't think either series is all that much. They're overlong tales of fantasy that are just average, but somehow gained a lot of popularity over the years. But, a choice was given so I choice I shall make.

I think people like ASOIAF because it was one of the first grimdark to come out, because of the TV show or because it's praised as being very original. And I agree in all accounts. Martin took a very gritty and dirty view on the whimsical fantasy, and I guess that made people intrigued. But the main problem is the story. While it does start with a reasonable number of plotlines and ideas, it eventually spirals out of control of, I think, even the author himself. ASOIAF was meant to be a trilogy, which was then expanded into 5 books, and now it's expected to be 7. A Game of Thrones I think is actually pretty good, and the second one is also fine, but eventually there's too much happening that it's hard to care about everything. And that's what I think a lot of people don't like about ASOIAF: the never-ending story (no reference intended). It just keeps going and going with no point or direction, and that just grew tiresome. There were times where I asked myself how we got to a certain point in the story and I'd say to myself, "It doesn't matter anyway. It's not like we're going anywhere."

I read the first four books of Jordan's WoT in high school, and I found two patterns to them: fulfill the prophecy stated at the beginning in a, supposedly, unexpected way and go from A to B to do X and Y. The entire book is then just about the journey or magic or discussion of the prophecy. Really, it's all a roundabout way of fooling the reader into thinking the story is going one way and then have it go a different way, of sorts. But I will say this. It took me nearly a month and a half to finish The Eye of the World, but I read the second in two weeks tops. Then the third I read in a month, but the fourth one in a considerably shorter amount of time. I didn't want to be bogged down by this one series for what I esrimated, quite realistically, could be a year or a year and a half. So I decided to take a break.

Now that I've given my opinions on the individual series, on to the comparison. I actually found myself liking Westeros a bit more. Sure, it's just another pseudo-European, medievalistic England-like rehash, but I found that it could actually work as a real world. Jordan's WoT world is fine and fairly well developed, but it felt both superficial and, paradoxically, complicated at the same time. I didn't think that Andor or Cairhien or the Aiel Waste could stand on their own, because they felt just like backdrops for things to happen. The multiple worlds, the different realms and alternate realities all made the story very complicated. And I actually thought this would have worked better as a sword and sorcery story instead of a massive fantasy epic. So I guess point goes to Martin for world-building.

As far as the story is concerned, I actually liked Jordan's take on the monomyth. He drew considerably from eastern philosophies, especially about the cyclical nature of the universe, duality and rebirth. This allows for many opportunities that he actually takes advantage of in the first few books. The dual magic system where women can wield magic but men can't is an interesting notion. I also liked that the whole good vs evil battle has happened an infinite amount of times already, and will probably happen an infinite amount of times again. The idea that good sometimes loses against evil is also something that I found very interesting. But this very take on the epic tale brings up what I think is one of Jordan's biggest problems. If this fight has happened already and will happen again, then what's the point of us caring about this one iteration? What's so special about this version of the universe where Rand is the Dragon Reborn if it's all going to happen again anyway? There might be an explanation later on in the series, but I personally found it a little problematic. But if there's anyone out there who knows the answer, I'd really appreciate an explanation, because this really always bugged me. Still, for all that, I liked Jordan's take a little more. So point goes to Jordan.

I'm going to say little about the writing style because both Martin and Jordan have an ok style. Both use long, fancy words to describe travels or landscapes, really some of the landmarks of the fantasy genre. I guess this part is a tie.

What I think is the defining factor is the characters. I never really found myself caring about either cast, in all honesty, and I think it's because of very different reasons. On the one hand, we have Martin, whose characters are certainly likeable and enjoyable. Who doesn't like Tyrion's sass or Ned's steel-hard code of honor? But at the same time, they all felt like mere pieces in a long game of Risk. "This piece is called Tyrion, and this one Daenerys and that one over there is Jon Snow. Let's play!" The characters weren't people for us to root for, but rather tools to keep the story going, arguably too long. I still gasped at every unexpected death and felt shocked at the twists, but never really felt emotionally invested in anything that happened. On the other hand is Jordan, who focuses a lot on duality or even multiplicity. He puts a lot of emphasis in the battle of the sexes, and it does get old after a while. All the men are supposed to be burly, Herculean, powerful fighters with no fear and hidden emotions, and all the women are also strong, but more manipulative and allegedly more intelligent than the men. But he's breaking one of the very tenets of his work: balance. The men always talk about how they're better than women and how they get women to do stuff, and the women are always talking about how THEY are better than men and so on. This whole back and forth makes it hard to connect or feel for some of the relationships that develop among the characters, and it makes for very unrealistic people. All the men are stubborn jackasses, and all the women are downright emasculating witches (literally. See Aes Sedai). But while the majority of the cast is a stereotype of one form or another, there are a few genuinely likeable characters that I wanted to know more about. Min, for instance, was pretty interesting. She's one of the few women who doesn't want a puddle of a man as a servant (something the Seanchan already perfected). Perrin was also nice. At first, I thought he was a bit underpowered and underwhelming. After all, he's nothing compared to the real Chosen One Rand and his ultimate magic. But Rand ends up being absent for most of the book titled after him and he's ultimately not very engaging. His struggle with himself and who he has to become is hardly explored and what little is said only makes Rand sound like a little brat. Egwene was also nice, but a little inconsistent. I could go on and on, describing each character, but they all fall into one of three categories in the end: Puppet, Puppeteer, Irrelevant. But, point goes to Jordan. For all the annoying stereotypes he draws on, I did end up liking a few of his characters, while Martin's felt always pretty flat.

So, I guess, I liked WoT more, since it has the better story and the better characters. But, in all honesty, I'd prefer to go back read ASIOAF instead of WoT. Maybe it's because the world is more interesting to me, or maybe it's because I haven't the foggiest idea of where the story is going (if anywhere). For all that Jordan does well, he's only retelling the Big Villain Taking Over the World and We Have to Stop Him story and, as such, we can predict the ending. Maybe not the finer details, and definitely not who lives or who dies, but I feel confident there will be a big battle with all the heroes fighting a swarm of bad minions and Rand going toe to toe with The Dark One or one of his close representatives.

A complicated answer, I guess, but then again, both series are pretty complicated too. They're long, meandering and filled with encyclopedias worth of characters, even if they're vastly different in their actual subject matter. English history rehash vs pulp-fiction like multiverses.

As far as which I think is better, I guess I'd answer that WoT is the answer, as it feels more complete. It really helps that the grand finale is written by one of the big contemporary fantasy authors, Brandon Sanderson (though Mr. Jordan will be greatly missed). But I believe that ASOIAF is more re-readable. Not only is it half as long (that is if Martin sticks with his 7 book notion), but easier to get into, I think, and faster paced. The point of the series isn't to be some monumental gamechanger but rather to be unexpected and entertaining. And as such, it does a good job. Jordan's WoT suffers most because it's telling a tale we already know, even if it's in a very different and unique way. I still want to go back and read it all. The multiverse is intriguing, and the mere size of the conflict is impressive.

This is probably a very ambivalent answer, but I feel pretty ambivalent towards both series anyway, so I guess it comes full circle. Sorry for the super-length (probably to match the wordiness of both authors), but I hope to have given a full, or at least decent, answer.

Pretty thorough comparison but your description of the characters in WoT suffers from only having read a quarter of it. Egwene as ‘nice’ made me lol!

Yes, Egwene as 'nice' also made me chuckle. Perrin is probably my favourite of the three boys and he definitely ends up being a proper hero (Rand annoys the hell out of me until about book 12, good thing I like the other characters!)

Saul wrote: 'He puts a lot of emphasis in the battle of the sexes, and it does get old after a while.' and 'All the men are stubborn jackasses, and all the women are downright emasculating witches'...

Yes, it does get tiresome

Brendan wrote: "The actual best series in fantasy is Discworld, by the wayc..."

Yes! Agreed :)

G33z3r wrote: "How come Wheel of Time & A Song of Ice and Fire seem to be the two series fen are always trying to compare?

Why doesn't anyone ever ask, Song of Ice and Fire or Lord of the Rings? Wheel of Time or..."

I think because they're the two 'big' series that came out at similar times and they've both got big fan-bases.

Interestingly enough, while I don't tend to see the books directly compared, I see quite a bit of author comparison Sanderson vs Rothfuss, or Sanderson vs GRR Martin, or Sanderson vs any contemporary writer now that I come to think of it... I feel like Sanderson is used a lot as the current writing benchmark

Egwene, as of book 4, is annoying, fawning over Rand but overall wants to help him out. Maybe because she has a crush on him. But again, I haven't finished the series, so she could well change.

Well I won’t spoil anything but her character at the end ...well she’s certainly doesn’t turn out anything like that!

I could not finish Eye of the World. Way too boring/YA/traditional for me.

I am definitely the minority here as I am obsessed with A Song of Ice and Fire. I read all the books and novellas, became a member of at least two fanclubs, read the essays in Tower of the the Hand, musing over fan theories in Tumblr, played the board games, listened to countless podcasts and participated in some of them. There is no other series that could make me spend as much time as ASoIAF, not even Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings.

Characters are everything to me in fiction and ASOIAF has the best ensemble. Great dialogue and intricate politics definitely help. It is still the best fantasy series for me, all worldbuilding and sprawled storylines from Westeros to Ulthos included.

Silvana wrote: "I could not finish Eye of the World (too boring/YA/traditional for me) and when I watched the first Shannara episode and saw that it is actually a post apocalyptic fantasy, that's just the coup de ..."

I'm a little confused - they're both epic fantasy but the Shannara series by Terry Brooks hasn't got anything to do with the Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan series (first book being Eye of the World) :)

Prefer WoT due to the greater fantasy element. Both good though. I agree with a lot of the comments here regarding these two series, being held up as showpieces for the genre. Neither compare to LotR IMO, and I’m always surprised/irritated by lack of mention of series like Wars of Light and Shadow, which is on a par with both WoT and ASOIAF.

Andy wrote: "...I’m always surprised/irritated by lack of mention of series like Wars of Light and Shadow, which is on a par with both WoT and ASOIAF. "

True & at least Wurts has kept up with the series. She just released Destiny's Conflict.

Cat wrote: "Silvana wrote: "I could not finish Eye of the World (too boring/YA/traditional for me) and when I watched the first Shannara episode and saw that it is actually a post apocalyptic fantasy, that's j..."

You're right. Had a brain fart there. Isn't WOT post-apocalyptic fantasy too? Anyway, even if it isn't, I still could not finish the first book.

Nope WoT is a traditional LoTR style with grotesque bad things, magic, and rulers and peasants

Silvana wrote: "Cat wrote: "Silvana wrote: "I could not finish Eye of the World (too boring/YA/traditional for me) and when I watched the first Shannara episode and saw that it is actually a post apocalyptic fanta..."

Technically they're post their own apocalypse (The Breaking) but it's not based on our world, so not post apocalypse in the usual sense of the genre.

Cat wrote: "Technically they're post their own apocalypse (The Breaking) but it's not based on our world, so not post apocalypse in the usual sense of the genre..."

Actually, a lot of people have the theory that the Age of Legend is actually modern day earth. With the exception of the One Power etc. of course :) So in a way, it is post apocalyptic ... ;)

https://scifi.stackexchange.com/quest...

I'm reading Lord of Chaos right now and I've read the five books of ASOIAF so far. And so far I like ASOIAF better. It's just a richer, more interesting world to me and the constant male-female antagonism in WoT gets a little tedious.

I like WoT a lot more, to me there isn't anyone to root for in ASOIAF, except a few of the Starks. There are no characters that I like, they are all shades of grey, if not all out scumbags. Personally the whitewalkers could take them all out and I wouldn't care.

As Geezer said though, there are more fantasitcal elements in WoT and ASOIAF is just waiting for someone else to betray each other. ASOIAF is more of a political drama with some fantasy elements in it than an actual fantasy novel.

...I mean as for Discworld, Terry Brooks seemed to be a great guy that truly cared about his works, but I've never been able to get more than a few pages into the books. To me they just try WAY too hard to be funny and it falls flat to me.

Ha- good points! I guess I was referring to the ‘feel’ of the WoT series which is solidly classic fantasy in my opinion.

Roger wrote: "I like WoT a lot more, to me there isn't anyone to root for in ASOIAF, except a few of the Starks. There are no characters that I like, they are all shades of grey, if not all out scumbags. Persona..."

I felt the same way towards him until I read Mort. I loved this one, because it's an actual novel with jokes in it instead of several jokes loosely tied together.

Saul wrote: "I felt the same way towards him until I read Mort. I loved this one, because it's an actual novel with jokes in it instead of several jokes loosely tied together. "

Yeah i highly recommend people try Mort (and maybe Guards! Guards!) before they write off Pratchett.

Brendan wrote: "Saul wrote: "I felt the same way towards him until I read Mort. I loved this one, because it's an actual novel with jokes in it instead of several jokes loosely tied together. "

Yeah i highly reco..."

It looks like I have tried The Color of Magic and Small Gods, maybe I'll give Mort a try before giving up on them.

I only just read Equal Rites and I'm glad I started there. I flipped open Colour of Magic and it doesn't have the same polish (but understanding his humor now, I think it will be fun when I can give it the attention I want to). Looking forward to Mort and Guards! Guards!

I haven't started WoT yet. I know, I know. I told you I'm behind in some of my classics. But I love ASoIaF. It is very low fantasy at this point, but I think the writing is clever, and the world the very definition of epic.

Hasham wrote: "Hi,

I hope you all are well.

I have read the first four books of A Song of Ice and Fire. I am currently reading the fourth book of The Wheel of Time, The Shadow Rising. I love these series but ..."

I actually didn't care for either.

I read the first few books of the Wheel of Time but I never really developed any connection to or real interest in the characters. I also found the plot meandering and slow.

I didn't even finish the first book of the Song of Ice and Fire series and found it so dull and boring that I gave it away. I've never watched the TV series, either, as it just don't come across as something that I would find interesting.

G33z3r wrote: "How come Wheel of Time & A Song of Ice and Fire seem to be the two series fen are always trying to compare?

Why doesn't anyone ever ask...Earthsea or Lord of the Rings?"
Ah! Now there is a comparison I can sink my teeth into. In a way, they are similar in that they are both fantasy quest stories where the protagonist must make a epic journey to stop a great evil.

They also both display great world building, although I think we need to give the nod to Tolkien in this category. I don't know of anyone who had rivaled the depth and breadth of backstory and world building that he created in LOTR and his associated writing and notes. Still Le Guin did create a rich and original world for her story that's head and shoulders above most other fantasy tales.

In the end, its a terribly difficult choice as to which I like best, but I guess if pressed to pick one, I would pick LOTR. As much as I enjoyed reading, and rereading, the Earthsea trilogy, it didn't capture my imagination quite as strongly as LOTR, and I've spent much more time hiking the lands of Middle Earth than sailing the waters of the Earthsea.

You do often see people asking LOTR or ASOIAF? Mostly because they're the two best known fantasy series.
I don't really feel the need to rank things that much. It really depends if you prefer that noble good wins over evil kind of thing or a more realistic everybody's out for themselves shades of grey thing.

I've also read Earthsea 1-4 and the first Chronicles of Amber but never got around to the second book. I don't have as much experience with fantasy as sci-fi.

I was mostly reading these books in the late 90's-mid-2000s when I was still a part of an online power metal forum where they were both really popular. ASOIAF lost me pretty fast even before all the current drama and I don't have much interest in ever continuing/finishing it despite not remembering much at this point. So by far I'd say I preferred WoT.

I distinctly remember picking up Eye of the World for the first time and getting totally addicted to it right off the bat despite how thick it was with those Bible-thin pages lol. It's been ages though, my memory's shoddy and I'd like to reread the series and actually finish it with Sanderson's additions one day.

I haven't finished WoT but I really love this series. I do like A Song Of Ice and Fire but it gets confusing. Most people have already mentioned that WoT has a deeply rooted history and a lot of mystery to it but that's what I love about it. The universe is so well thought out and I love the characters. I love how Jordan can take a seemingly meaningless event from one book and it becomes important in another.
As to why people compare these two series, I think that one reason is of course marketing but also the two authors were really good friends and have often commented on each others work. It could be completely unrelated but I always figured that was why.

Both are not among my favourites, but I like ASOIAF better than WoT which I started reading with high expectations, but quit after the first book.

I found The Eye of the World flat, the worldbuilding, characters and the plot too similar to LoTR. Obviously many fantasy works are inspired by Tolkien, but to me Jordan's book seemed more like a fanficition and not an independent work. Jordan simply renamed orcs to trollocs, ringwraiths to shadowspan, Merry and Pippin to Mat and Perrin, and so on. He even has an ent (forgot the WoT name).
Now I have no problem reading fanfiction, but not when everything is stereotypical and flat with all 'daaaarkness is approaching, and the chosen one has to save the world', and the Chosen One With a Birth Secret (Rand) seems such a wish fulfillment character for boys... and the female characters all resemble each other.
I am probably being unfair, I was told that the author improved a lot after the first book, but I am not involved in any of the characters or the world so unless I will be trapped in a house with a raging snow storm outside and with only WoT for company, I won't continue the series.
ASOIAF also has a bunch of problems, but it is entertaining in a soap opera way and has some hilarious characters. While I dislike the author's favourite pets (noble bastard John Snow and Tyrion) still each character has their unique voice. I absolutely love to read about Olenna Tyrell, Bronn, Sansa and especially Arya - her arc really worked for me.

I was not really taken with either of them. I find Asoiaf irritating. I love other fantasy series with a bit of darkness and grit but Asoiaf had far too much for me. It was less about the story and more about which character was going to die horribly next (probably all of them by the time Martin is finished). There was no hope in it. I just found it far too depressing. Although his world building is great. And I found wot hard to get into as well. Maybe because it's such a long series it feels daunting. I only read the first book but I didn't like it. I am going to give it another go because my dad was talking to me about it and he loves it. But I don't think either of them measure up to Earthsea, The Magician series by Feist or even James Islington's work (The Shadow of what was lost and An echo of things to come).

The craziest thing about WoT is why everybody's always wearing coats in the middle of an unnatural heat wave.
And they're always going on about this thing of making yourself not sweat. Sweating serves a purpose even if it doesn't look very dignified. Take off your damn coat!

Blood and Ashes! The Wheel weaves as the Wheel wills.

I can't choose one over the other. I love both series the same. My favorite characters are Matrim Cauthon from WoT and Daenerys Targaryen, Arya Starks and Tyrion Lannister from GoT.

I preferred WoT. I think the story is much better and focused. To my mind, A Song of Ice and Fire wanders too much without a clear-cut main character. Even with the changes in POV in WoT you always knew who the series was about. Mat Cauthon was my favorite character who added a lot of color and unexpected twists.

Now that I've finished "A Crown of Swords" I've been looking through "The World of Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time". (I glanced at it too early and got a major spoiler.)
It's helped me understand much better about how many "ages" there have been and the order of the wars etc. The books really should come with a timeline. Also, I find Robert Jordan's maps kind of hard to read.
Anyway, does "The Wheel of Time Companion" have a lot more information? And when could I read that to avoid major spoilers?

Book Nerd wrote: "Anyway, does "The Wheel of Time Companion" have a lot more information? And when could I read that to avoid major spoilers? ..."

The The Wheel of Time Companion is a very large (>1000pp) encyclopedia of alphabetized people, places & things in Wot, from a'dam (a ter'angreal) to Zushi (a windfinder). A reference book, not really for reading.

Pro tip: you can find almost identical information at the DragonMount website, with the advantage of being hyperlinked and searchable. (Much of the Companion was assembled by the Dragonmount creators.) It's an impressive volume for your bookcase, but the website is far more practical :)

G33z3r wrote: "Book Nerd wrote: "Anyway, does "The Wheel of Time Companion" have a lot more information? And when could I read that to avoid major spoilers? ..."

The The Wheel of Time Companion i..."
Cool, thanks.

I haven't read A Song of Ice and Fire but The Wheel of Time is pretty epic.

I read WoT as it was published, and I've reread all but the Sanderson books many times. As with anything I reread that much, I eventually notice the flaws more and get a bit burned out on the work. But I loved the series, and still love most of it. Well, half of it at least.

I've just started reading ASOIAF, and I'm on book 3. My feelings may be colored by the fact that it's new to me, but overall I like the writing style much better at this point than I do Jordan's. As descriptive and verbose as Jordan was about the landscape and the clothing, etc., as many times as I've read the books, I've never been able to visualize anything or anyone from Randland. Granted, the GoT show probably helped me visualize GRRMs world but... I really think I would have felt more connected to it even without that. Little things like the obviously loving way GRRM describes food, and the odd little details of, IMO, more complex personalities, and a better handling of POVs endear me to the series and... prepare me to be fairly annoyed that he'll never finish it.

So, being in two completely different points on my journey through these books, right now I have to say I prefer ASOIAF.

Sorry, RJ :/. You should have finished it at book 6. Just saying. Oh, and you should have stopped throwing in named characters just for the sake of being able to boast a cast of thousands and just stuck to the story you started. And... talking to a dead guy, pardon.