If you're a Walking Dead viewer wondering if the comic is as good as the series -- the short answer is that they both excel in very different ways... I'd call it a draw, and there's absolutely no reason to take sides. Even more than Game of Thrones and ASOIAF, the show has transcended the source material by altering the plot and the fates of several major characters, adding entirely new faces like Daryl Dixon ( who has become a wild card for comic fans and a favorite for many). As someone who followed the comics before the series, I don't say this glibly, but while the comic was superior to the show for the first couple seasons, the show has gradually taken the lead in Season's 4 & 5. 
 But the comic is still powerful storytelling, and remains the soul and center. One thing Kirkman, Adlard, and the writers of the show deserve praise for is the way both storylines have diverged. 'The Walking Dead' is essentially two parallel worlds, both of them with the worst fucking luck imaginable, caught in the accretion disk of a black hole named 'Kirkman'; the fate of both worlds looks grim, their original casts getting smaller and smaller, to eventually be swallowed up. 
 Like 'Crossed', Garth Ennis' pitch-black, utterly horrifying and nihilistic imagining of a Rabies-like viral apocalypse, there will be no cures, no miracles, no big plans, no daring rescues, no hope for a better tomorrow -- survival is everything. If you know the comic, you will still have no idea what's going to happen in the show, and vice versa. There are moments where both stories seem to coalesce, but then break apart to follow separate roads once again (Episode 3 of Season 6 is a good example -- what the fuck?! Issue 100 of the comic had prepared me for a similarly unsettling exit, but it managed to capture the sense of sudden, shocking finality that the comic has excelled at. No last second, improbable deus ex machine salvation; the seemingly hopeless predicament is truly hopeless). 
 [Whichever artist you prefer, original penciller/inker Tony Moore or super-long-term replacement Charles Adlard, it's a moot point now, since the former did six fucking issues, compared to Adlard's 140-and-counting. Still, Moore did a fine job establishing the early look and feel, and it took me awhile to warm up to the 'new guy'. Considering Moore's 6 issues and covers gave him co-creator status, that has to be one of the best-paying assignments in comics history.] 
 Art by Tony Moore: 
 Art by Charles Adlard: 
 This is the format to buy, without question. The deluxe hardcover is larger, the 8" x 11" oversized edition instead of the standard 7" x 10". Each hardcover book contains two of the softcover volumes; so Book 1 collects Volumes 1 and 2. Every storyline is about the same length -- 6 comicbook issues. So the Volumes are around 150 pages, and the Books are a bit longer, 320 or so pages; they come with extras -- like the original single-issue covers, and miscellaneous artwork from Charlie Adlard and Tony Moore -- that the softcover Volumes do not. While Adlard has been the series artist for a very long time, and does a brilliant, remarkably quick, and consistent job, Tony Moore's art in Book 1 played a big part in the success of 'The Walking Dead'; unfortunately, he couldn't keep up with the unforgiving monthly pace. Pricewise, each oversized, extra-long hardcover Book is about the same price as the two softcover volumes it collects. Oh, right -- it's about a group struggling to survive the zombie apocalypse. Highly recommended. 
 [The Adlard interiors have continued to improve, but Moore's covers for the first couple dozen issues were another critical factor in the book's success; their inclusion in the hardcovers is a significant plus, IMO:] 
 P.S.: The Compendiums are the most affordable way to pick up the comic -- collecting 48 single issues/8 Volumes/4 Books/2 Omnibus(es) (Omnibae?). They're a bit awkward though. The Omnibus is the super-deluxe format, similar to the Absolute Editions from DC. Image does as excellent job producing each.