I read this novel after an almost chronological reading in the Sherlock Holmes's novels and short stories.
I certainly started with "a study in scarlet" which was fine, then went to "the sign of four" which was even finer. These two novels where enough to get me hooked on the world of Doyle's Holmes. Then to make things even better, I read the "adventures of Sherlock Holmes," a collection of short stories, which were excellent, followed by "the memoir of Sherlock Holmes" which was on the same lines as the adventures, but Sherlock Holmes was finally killed by Moriarty in the last short story of the collection. I was not afraid, because the remaining pages of the collection of stories I had was still thick, so I knew something was going to happen. Sure enough, Sherlock Holmes was resurrected in the next collection (not before "the hound of Baskervilles", although it is traditionally given before it in the complete works) which was called "the return of Sherlock Holmes." Up to this point I was a big fan of Holmes, but this story: "the hound of Baskervilles," came to destroy everything.
The first aspect I hated about it, was that it wasn't a mystery. It was a quest behind the villain, who was knowen by the middle of the story ... and no wonder, for Doyle wrote this after the acclaimed death of Holmes. He was not ready yet to bring back his detective, and he was actually going to write this story with different characters, until he was struck by Holmes as an already existing character of his, and that he needn't waste his time creating some new character line.
The story is not totally bad, but the idea of having Holmes in a non mystery novel did not strike me as plausible.
I recommend you to read it. It seems, from the review, that I was the only one not to like it, but I can't control that. What I do not like is what I do not like, and I hope you found something useful in this review.