Depends on your needs. If you need the amenities like Wash.Co. listed, go that way.
If good hunting access is more important, then being near state land is a good idea, if for no other reason than you'll never be "posted out" of hunting land nearby.
My camp is on land that once belonged to an uncle's dairy farm. So I kinda fell into a good deal over 40 years ago and have no regrets.
Can still hunt on most of the adjoining land, but lots of the places I hunted on around there as a kid, are now posted and off limits due to being bought as camp land by non-locals.
A friend of mine has owned three camps south of Galeton over the past 30 years. None of them had any hunting land, so he's always had to hunt on SGLs or SF land nearby.
The one he has now, is more like a new house with every amenity. It is on about 5 acres, little of which can be hunted due to safety zone issues with nearby camps. So his wife likes it, but he grumbles constantly about lousy deer hunting on the state land.
Suggested years ago that he forego the pleasures and spend the money on hunting land, instead of putting it into a nice camp with little else to recommend it. He's right back where he started with his first Potter camp: No hunting land, but his current wife loves the place.
For the amount of money he has in the "new house", he could've purchased a few hundred acres of decent hunting land up there and used a camper.