Lord of the Rings is the classic fantasy series that defined the fantasy genre. It is the greatest fantasy trilogy to ever be written and anyone who says otherwise simply needs to read the books to understand.
Reasons why Lord of the Ríngs kicks Game of Thrones butt
1. Characters have way more development than Game of Throne characters. Tolkien put more thought into the way he wrote characters than Martin does. I found myself caring about what happened to Gandalf, Merry and Pippin, and Aragorn. With Game of Thrones Martin did not give me much of their personality before he killed them. I was not sad when Ned Stark died because Martin did not make me care enough about him beforehand.
2. World building is much more creative and detailed than Martin's. Martin simply took the War of the Roses and threw in some dragons. Tolkien was a philologist and actually used a combination of Old English and other ancient languages to create an entirely new language for his own world. It made the world much more believable. Martin's world does not seem as engrossing as Tolkien's.
3. Lord of the Rings is actually fantasy. The whole point of fantasy is being able to escape realism and become immersed in a world that we could never imagine living in the real world. That is why I don't understand why saying Game of Thrones is realistic is meant to be praise. If Game of Thrones is realistic, surely that means it has failed as a fantasy story? If I wanted realism why would I bother reading Game of Thrones when I can just pick up a history book on the War of the Roses?
4. There is no pointless violence in Lord of the Rings. All the violence that Lord of the Rings features serves as a crucial element to the plot of the story. The death of King Theoden allowed other characters to develop emotionally. The violence in Game of Thrones is often gratuitous. What was the point of having Daeneryis raped by Drogo if she was only going to end up developing Stockholm Syndrome and falling in love with him? Her rape did not develop her as a character. I mean you would expect a 12 year old to feel some trauma from being rape by some 30 year old man (yes guys. She was 12 in the book).
5. Lord of the Rings wrote better female characters than Game of Thrones. In Game of Thrones, most women are either whores, angry ugly females, damsels in distress, or they are just rape victims. In Lord of the Rings we have characters like Galadriel and Eowyn who actually played important roles in the plot.
6. Lord of the Rings had the underdogs as the main characters of the story. Frodo and Sam were just two little hobbits who no one expected would achieve fame. They were not typical main heroes of a story. They had no angst but were just normal happy hobbits. That is why Lord of the Rings is such a charming story. In Game of Thrones all the main characters are good at sword fighting and all seem to have some tragic past. There is nothing wrong with having your main character not have a horrendous past.
In the end it comes down to personal tastes. I will always see Game of Thrones as being mediocre to LOTR and I don't see it ever having the same impact on the fantasy genre that LOTR did.