which story was more developed, harry potter vs. twilight? (please only answer if you've read BOTH series!)?

Harry Potter, definitely. First because she had seven books to do it in, but also because the characters were complex and developed from the very beginning. Harry has always been complicated and questioning his place in the world and what he needs to do, and the plot was thought out instead of randomly written down as the author saw fit. Twilight had gaping plot holes a lot of the time, and the characters were two-dimensional and overall bland and fake. Harry Potter's plot tied everything together, whereas Breaking Dawn's just added randomness to the mix. It's like a chef cooking a gourmet meal with a recipe, and one cooking it without AND missing some ingredients which he can't be bothered to replace. Rowling's characters also don't "write the book for her" as Meyer's apparently do.

I have read the whole Twilight Saga(more than once) and I am almost done with the Harry Potter series. Really, magazines and all that public stuff made a HUGE mistake comparing the two books. It puts uneeded rivlary with the Twilight fans and Harry Potter fans. Also, the people that are fans of both feel a need to decide between the books. Everyone is going to have different opinions on which is better and which is not. There both different and the only thing they have in common is the devoted fans, it just happens J.K Rowling has a lot more. To answer your question, most of the time people haven't even read one of the series and claim that the one they read is better. Pathetic i know.

Harry Potter obviously. Twilight is chock-full of plot holes and there were WAY too many new characters introduced in BD, and many of the main characters were really out of character- thats not good character development. And in Twilight Bella mostly stays the same, she just like "omg Edward is hot" the whole time. That also, is not character development. Harry Potter on the other hand, grows from a kid to being almost a man in the series. The other characters all grow and develop too. There are hardly any plot holes, and the whole series is more well planned out in general. Harry Potter pwns Twilight, end of story.

Harry Potter, no contest. The Twilight Series had more holes than swiss cheese. The characters were two-demensional and cliche. For instance, Rosalie is the average blond and Emmett is the average jock. They don't get any deeper.

All of the Characters in Harry Potter, even the minor ones, had defined personalities. Take Mundungus or Colin Creevey. They barely have any lines, and yet JK Rowling brings them to life. And even though Harry Potter had some holes, most of them are covered up pretty well. You didn't see fans returning their copies of The Deathly Hallows.

This one isn't up for debate, and it isn't a matter of opinion. If you were to count out all the plot holes in Harry Potter and all the plot holes in Twilight, Twilight would have a lot more. Doesn't matter which one you like better, Harry Potter was more developed (which is why it had SEVEN books).

Harry Potter. I'm also a Twilight lover but even I have to admit that it does not beat Harry Potter. Bella doesn't develop completely, her life is Edward and that's it. In Harry Potter we can watch the characters grow, especially Harry, as they mature. In Deathly Hallows almost everything is answered with a great plot and storyline while in Breaking Dawn, the plot is not as well written and leaves questions unanswered, and readers unsatisfied. I think the first book in the series Twilight was great but Harry Potter was a better overall series.

I think that Harry Potter is a bit more defined in the plotline and characters. Due to the face that the series is longer that Twilight, she had more time to define the major (Harry, Ron, Hermione) characters as well as the minor (Lupin, Tonks, Neville, Luna, Sirius, etc) ones. She managed to keep the original plotline of finding a way to defeat Voldemort and write about a different adventure in every book.

Twilight's main goal is to keep Bella and Edward together. I do like that, with each book, you learn more about the Cullens' past. Both have different goals, obstacles, and genres. While theyre both fantasy, one has more adventure, while the other has more romance.

If I'm being honest, Harry Potter was more developed. But I am a 100% Twilight fan and I do give Stephanie Meyer credit for doing her research on everything in the Twilight Series. Because I had no clue about Forks, Washington or First Beach or those cars or the Quilete tribe at all. But J.K Rowling gives you more of an understanding of her characters. I mean all we know about Emmett is that...he got mauled by a grizzle bear and Rosalie saved him. You don't get much on Sue or any of the other characters like them. But I still love Twilight more. Harry Potter got boring after a while.

Harry Potter - Rowling developed an entire history and mythology for the world that she created in her books. According to interviews, she wrote volumes of backstory that she was never able to work into the series. Meyer tells a passably interesting story, but her characters are mostly flat and the plot is fairly thin.

Harry Potter, for me, there is no comparison. JK Rowling spent a long time defining every charecter closely and making every piece of the plot fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. Its almost as if JK Rowling created her own world, and often, I think her readers get very wrapped up in that world, its hard to believe its not real because it's so well described and everything makes so much sense.

i love harry potter, i like twilight.

The Harry Potter series was definitely more defined and complex in the plotline. The characters in the Twilight series were more complex than those of Harry Potter. In a way the holes in the plot line of Twilight is made up for by the characters.