Which is a better queen-pawn game? I personally enjoy the Queen's gambit...

So stick with it, and you may find it reassuring that most grandmasters are with you.

Thx...

When i started playing chess, only a year ago, I feared learning the queen's gambit, as well as many other openings. I stuck to Guiocco Piano opening lines. Also, I didn't think that the King's gambit was any good, either, and loved to play against it. My general thoughts were: what is it with these gambits? Giving up a pawn? For what? As the year went by, a friend of mines bought a book and took it to my house. Upon opening it to a random page, it landed on opening lines for the queen's gambit. I simply decided I was going to read through it, and eventually studied it a few months. I am not only happy I did, but I now believe that it is very important for a player to familiarize with those lines and its' concepts, particularly because of something similar to what silentiarius said: as you get better, everyone plays it [and it's for a reason]. The London system, ironically, I remember was the very first opening line I learned and used to get my very first win against the computer on chess.com. Since that day, the first win against the computer, I never have used it. I gained confidence, and can beat the computer now with a variety of openings, some better than others. In shorter words: queen's gambit. In the long run, you'll want to find out all the other less popular openings, or openings in general, to diversify your game.

Queen's gambit > for who love to maintain on main lines .. till a mistake of opponent ..
London system > For creativity .. you should have the ability to create your chances..
Guiocco piano > to simplify the game if you want that .. and if the game is complicated your opponent will be hard on you to defeat him .. 
My fav opennings ..
Italian..
London system..
king's gambit.
some times I play Vienna ..
* use transportion from openning to another .. it will smash your opponent mind >  

The queen's gambit is not really a gambit. Black most likely will not accept, but if they do, you can either choose between 3.e4, or 3.Qa4+ and Qxc4. It leads to complicated lines, with one side usually having the advantage.

The Queen's Gambit is a true gambit. It is so strong that Black has no chance to keep the pawn if he accepts.

And, btw, if he accepts, 3.Nf3 is the most common move. It prevents e5 and the fact that White has time for a prophylactic move proves just how strong this gambit is. 3.e4 is also fine but 3.Qa4+ is pretty lame.

I thought the definition of a true gambit was that you ultimately do sacrifice a piece. Considering this, I believe unknown is right in saying it's not really a gambit, then again I'm not sure. If this were true, I believe silent's first two sentences are contradicting in the last post. You say it is a true gambit, and then say black has no chance to keep it. Well, it's because of not being able to hold onto it that it's not a real gambit, no?

Yes and no.

Historically, the term gambit was used for allowing opponent pawns to capture own pawns which were either unprotected or for relinquishing to recapture the opponent pawn. So piece sacrifices or letting pawns be captured by pieces are no gambits in the original sense.

The Queen's gambit, however, fits the definition. The fact the trying to keep the gambit pawn leads to disadvantage doesn't change that. Every gambit can be accepted or declined, gambit pawns may be regained or not.

In modern usage, gambit is often used as a synonym for sacrifice.

Perhaps I'm reading too many old chess books.

Both are fine and have their own reasons for playng. But If your not into learning a whole lot of theory, then I'd personally recommend the London system.

The London System is one closed opening that many people start out with. It is like the Italian game or the Gucio Piano. 

The Queen's gambit is the most popular queen pawn game. If black is not familar with it, then they will probaly be crushed. Then again, they could know it by heart and play complicated book openings like the Slav, the orthodox, indian defenses, or even a countergambit/gambit like the Benko.