POLL : Do you prefer PoF Expansion (casual/explorer) or HoT expansion (group/meta)

[Danikat.8537]

If I had to pick one or the other I prefer HoT but my ideal would be a mix of both.

 

I love the map design in HoT. Even now I think I find something new every time I go there, or at least something I didn't remember. But I understand why other people find it frustrating and I think a middle ground should be possible where it's still got lots of optional hidden things and places you can climb/fall/explore but also clear paths between the major objectives so people who just want to get to their destination can do it.

 

Same with meta-events. I like doing the big meta-events in HoT and I really like the way they have a significant impact on the maps. It always disappointed me that a lot of the big events in core maps are meaningless. If it wasn't for the loot and achievements the best way to deal with Tequatl, the Shatterer and the other dragon champions would be to ignore them - they'll stomp a bit, smash a couple of things right in front of them and then go home with no real harm done. I much prefer it when big events impact us as players and the map as a whole. But again I understand that some people just want to get their 1 goal for the day done ASAP and don't want to find that they need 50 people to complete a meta-event chain to do it. And I think a middle ground is possible where we're not completely locked out of areas of the map due to the current phase of the event, but they still impact the state of the map and what's available. Maybe services and NPCs are in more inconvenient or dangerous places when the events are in a bad state, or it could be like Drytop - you can access most services all the time but it will cost more.

 

Likewise I think we need a mix of areas where there's so many enemies someone like me (deliberately slow combat) will struggle to clear them all solo before they respawn, places with a few dangerous enemies (or ones with special mechanics like the smokescales) and places which are guaranteed to be safe so we can stop briefly to sort out inventory or get a drink or just to look around. It doesn't need to be anything big, in HoT that's often achieved by going out on a branch or 1/2 way up a cliff, somewhere slightly off the path where enemies can't reach you. Because PoF is so flat those spots are harder to come by and I think that adds to the feeling that it's just constant combat.

 

This is one reason I'm hoping the next expansion takes us somewhere we've never been and know almost nothing about (like east of Ascalon). It gives Anet almost total freedom to design whatever kind of maps they want to suit the kind of mechanics they want to make and/or players currently say they want to play. (Bearing in mind before HoT the consensus was 'we' said core Tyria was too easy and an expansion should be harder, after HoT 'we' said that was too hard and not friendly to solo players who don't like to run with the crowd so we got PoF and what's being said now is likely a reaction to PoF, so what 'we' want might well change again once the next expansion is released.)

[Evueimeimei.5918]

For me, it really depends on which aspects we're talking about... I think each expansion was, in some way, an improvement on the last, but each also had their flaws.

 

If we're talking creatures, PoF was probably the best, in my opinion. Core Tyria's enemies were, for the most part, easy to either kill fast or ignore. They didn't slow progress or provide much incentive to kill them. HoT had much the opposite. In general, those mobs tended to hit a bit too hard, and rarely let you get anywhere without a fight (or many fights). PoF struck a fairly good balance between the two. Creatures were fairly plentiful and dangerous, but not constant and semi-deadly. You often need to fight your way to a resource or vendor, but you don't constantly have to fight. (And of course, if I never see another zone with pocket raptors or smokescales, it'll still be too soon)

 

In terms of events and tasks while progressing through the story, Core probably wins here, though PoF is a close second. I know this is a topic where everyone's opinion is different, but I really enjoy the hearts. It was weird for me to not have them in HoT, and I occasionally felt a bit lost without that little bit of direction as to where in the zone was a good place to do things. I haven't decided quite yet how I feel about plentiful vs repeatable hearts, but I think both have their merits. The reason I picked Core over PoF is because of the little events in and around the heart areas. Both areas of the game have these events, but Core tends to have them spread out through the zone or in series whereas in PoF I often run into several all stacked at the same time in the same general area (which isn't a particularly great type of "more is better').

 

For things that bring you back to the zones after you've progressed past them, HoT is the clear winner here. World bosses were pretty good, they were interesting and often had several events attached to them, but over time they've mostly ceased to offer a challenge (probably a result of knowledge and power creep), not to mention that I don't enjoy teleporting all over the world chasing the events. HoT made the world bosses into zone-wide longer term meta events, and they were, in general, great. I still see people doing them on a regular basis and they still offer rewards that people care about. The biggest issue with HoT meta events is that they come up often enough that they can stall progress if you're trying to do something in those zones that is not a meta. PoF seems to have largely replaced meta events with bounties. Bounties are terrible. I'm sure they seemed good in the first few weeks (which I missed), but at this point, only 11 months into the expansion, it's already quite a challenge to manage to get more than 2-3 people together to do a bounty in any zone other than Crystal Oasis, and for many of those bounties, that isn't enough people unless they're very geared and skilled. I'm not sure if this is due to the reward offered or the challenge or just people would rather do meta events in other zones, but it can be quite frustrating for people trying to catch up and I already feel sorry for anyone joining the game in the future and trying to get their griffon or PoF specialization weapon during a future expansion.

 

In the realm of exploration, it's a close call whether PoF or Core is better, but certainly HoT is worse. It was hard to navigate the verticality of HoT maps, particularly in VB where going too far down often meant your death. Core Tyria had a lot more places to explore, and a lot fewer deadly vistas (landing the glider on a tiny branch in the middle of the sky is not fun). PoF has been fun to explore partly just due to seeing verticality handled better and partly because it's been fun to find the hidden chests and lost dwarven treasures. Treasures are not new, but the smaller, more common, but tucked into interesting places nature of these has made them more fun to find, in my opinion.

 

There are many other aspects that make a difference to the enjoyability and replayability of an expansion, but I think those are some of the bigger ones, and I've already probably written too much for a poll response.

 

Edit: For the record, I voted for Core, because if I have to choose just one set of mechanics to play with, that would be my preference. The casual combat, large amounts of exploration, and choices to make within the story were better as a whole to me than taking the whole of either of the expansions, even though both expansions offered some very nice additions. I think though, the next expansion should be a mix of mechanics and ideas that worked well in other places as well as new ideas.

[Arden.7480]

> @"buntalanlucu.4036" said:

>

> Please state your preference with regards of Guild Wars 2 Expansion

 

HoT is just pure grind- effective, but still grind.

 

PoF is very casual. I love doing the event on the maps! Also Bounty system is very nice, there is no 'MUST'.

 

In my opinion PoF is the best.

 

I very much hope the 3rd expansion will unite PoF and HoT with addition of something brand new and original.

 

 

[Goettel.4389]

HoT >> PoF, no surprise there.

I prefer HoT precisely because I'm a casual player. A casual **MMO** player that is: I like random groups to do content with.

There are other genres which cater far better to the solo player.

[darkwarrior.6102]

In general, I agree with pretty much everything Evueimeimei.5918 said.

The only thing I'll add is that for the poll itself, I voted for HoT, because I love the way the meta events worked in those zones. I agree with all of her comments regarding the difficulty of monsters in the various zones (including agreeing that PoF had a solid balance there), and I share her frustration with exploring the HoT zones (which felt more frustrating than rewarding). If I had to pick only one expansion's mechanics, it would be HoT, but I do think both Core and PoF offered some great advantages that I would like to see carried into the future. (Even just replacing the bounty system with HoT-style meta events would have been an incredible system, imo.)

[Evueimeimei.5918]

Going back and reading more of the responses, it seems a lot of people enjoyed the exploration of HoT based on the thrill of locating a path to your destination and fighting (or leaping) to get there. With that definition in mind, I can see where a lot of people would love the exploration of HoT. There was quite a bit of danger and puzzle to finding your way around those maps.

 

For me though, that's not the exciting part about exploration. I get frustrated by having to regularly fight through things or jump off cliffs just to see the pathway to get from point A to point B. For me, the fun in exploration is finding a place I didn't know existed or a place with some unusual architecture or interesting lore, or a name I recognize from GW1 or from some book I read in the Priory's library. I like things that look hidden or abandoned, particularly if they don't have any actual significance to why I'm currently in the area.

 

I guess it would be beneficial to include both types of exploration in future expansions. It seems too much of either type can be bothersome, depending on which you like.

[PyrateSilly.4710]

You are missing 2 choices ....

None of the above

All of the above

 

My choice is "All of the Above" as I enjoy the whole game. There is not one land/map/expansion that I like more or less than any other. I made new chars just to explore new things. Going for 100% map and story on a combination of races and professions. I am really enjoying all of the game.

[AliamRationem.5172]

> @"Plautze.6290" said:

> While both expansions have their merits, I prefer PoF, as I'm a filthy casual who loves to explore.

 

So, you love to explore, but you didn't like huge, layered maps that are specifically designed to force you to put down your map and find objectives by...exploring?

 

To each their own, I suppose. I love to explore, which is why the HoT maps have always been my favorites!

[Plautze.6290]

> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> > @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > While both expansions have their merits, I prefer PoF, as I'm a filthy casual who loves to explore.

>

> So, you love to explore, but you didn't like huge, layered maps that are specifically designed to force you to put down your map and find objectives by...exploring?

>

> To each their own, I suppose. I love to explore, which is why the HoT maps have always been my favorites!

 

I loved the HoT maps. The inhabitants not so much.

Let's not forget that tastes differ.

Having to wait for a HP train to get that mushroom queen is not my definition of "exploration", but as you said, to each their own ;)

[AliamRationem.5172]

> @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> > > @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > > While both expansions have their merits, I prefer PoF, as I'm a filthy casual who loves to explore.

> >

> > So, you love to explore, but you didn't like huge, layered maps that are specifically designed to force you to put down your map and find objectives by...exploring?

> >

> > To each their own, I suppose. I love to explore, which is why the HoT maps have always been my favorites!

>

> I loved the maps. The inhabitants not so much.

> Let's not forget that tastes differ.

 

Sure! But you only mentioned the exploring part, which I thought was a little odd given that the HoT maps are an explorer's dream like no other game I've played before. Tangled Depths especially is packed with hidden pathways and objectives that you really have no choice but to find your way to without the aid of a map. It took me months to learn all of its secrets...and every once in awhile I still find a new one!

 

PoF is a great playground for mounts, but it's basically core Tyria 2.0. The terrain has a lot of elevation change to accommodate mounts, but it's otherwise your basic straight-line-from-A-to-B flat map design where "exploring" consists of just walking toward objectives marked on the map.

 

Anyway, I get you. It's not much fun if you can't handle the enemies. Although I'm surprised that PoF enemies don't give you trouble. They seem just as strong as HoT enemies to me, and more numerous with much larger aggro range. But then I suppose we have mounts now, which makes it easier to simply bypass them. Have you tried HoT since mounts were added? It might make a difference!

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

Where's "No particular preference" in that poll? Because that's my answer.

[Evueimeimei.5918]

> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> > @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > While both expansions have their merits, I prefer PoF, as I'm a filthy casual who loves to explore.

>

> So, you love to explore, but you didn't like huge, layered maps that are specifically designed to force you to put down your map and find objectives by...exploring?

>

> To each their own, I suppose. I love to explore, which is why the HoT maps have always been my favorites!

 

Like I was mentioning earlier, there seem to be two different definitions of "explore"; one involving discovering the path(s) to destinations/objectives, and the other locating things that you weren't aware were there. It seems, from what I've seen so far, that people who use the first definition prefer HoT, while people who use the second prefer PoF or Core.

[AliamRationem.5172]

> @"Evueimeimei.5918" said:

> > @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> > > @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > > While both expansions have their merits, I prefer PoF, as I'm a filthy casual who loves to explore.

> >

> > So, you love to explore, but you didn't like huge, layered maps that are specifically designed to force you to put down your map and find objectives by...exploring?

> >

> > To each their own, I suppose. I love to explore, which is why the HoT maps have always been my favorites!

>

> Like I was mentioning earlier, there seem to be two different definitions of "explore"; one involving discovering the path(s) to destinations/objectives, and the other locating things that you weren't aware were there. It seems, from what I've seen so far, that people who use the first definition prefer HoT, while people who use the second prefer PoF or Core.

 

I can accept that. Besides, it's been made clear in many a poll/discussion that I'm in the tiny minority of people who love Tangled Depths above any other map! I don't expect many to agree with me on that, but I love that map because of the exploration aspect. As you say, it's about discovering the many pathways to reach objectives, not all of which are marked on a map!

[Turin.6921]

I want a combination of both. HoT content for the core maps of the expansion and casual/explorer on a few of them and LS maps.

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> > > @"Plautze.6290" said:

> > > While both expansions have their merits, I prefer PoF, as I'm a filthy casual who loves to explore.

> >

> > So, you love to explore, but you didn't like huge, layered maps that are specifically designed to force you to put down your map and find objectives by...exploring?

> >

> > To each their own, I suppose. I love to explore, which is why the HoT maps have always been my favorites!

>

> I loved the HoT maps. The inhabitants not so much.

> Let's not forget that tastes differ.

> Having to wait for a HP train to get that mushroom queen is not my definition of "exploration", but as you said, to each their own ;)

 

What does killing a veteran versus a champ at a HP have to do with exploring?

[Rauderi.8706]

It's possible to have both, it just hasn't been executed well, yet.

Most of the complaints about the HoT metas were:

1. They got in the way of exploration, requiring players to be around at specific, small windows to get to some places.

2. There were few places to sit and rest.

 

That's about it. Please give me things to do when I come into a zone, but don't lock POIs and other things behind waiting for a meta.

[Vayne.8563]

Too much bias in the question, for my taste. For example, I like HoT more than POF, but what if POF were as profitable to farm as HOT is? Then suddenly it becomes a whole different question. I think mounts have done more for the game over all than gliding and when I factor mounts in, even though I like HoT zones better, I like POF better, but that's not really an option in this poll.

 

The problem is HoT metas are profitable and POF isn't profitable and because of that a lot of people are going to like HOT better. They say it's because of the metas but if the metas in POF has the kind of rewards Dragon Stand and AB had, it might be a whole different story.

 

Over all, I think anything gleaned from this poll is bound to mislead. The bias is in the phrasing of the options.

[Edelweiss.4261]

Over the past months, I've grown fond of HoT maps. However, I think there should be a balance of the two. I'd personally like a HoT:PoF ratio of 1:2. I like being able to do content on my own, but HP trains are amazingly satisfying. Why not scale HP enemies according to players on the specific map. Only 2 people on the map? Make it a veteran. Over 50 people on the map? Make it a champion. Max capacity? Give us a legendary! This way you can do satisfying group content without being penalized for off-hour playing or being late to the map. I know they already have some scaling, but I don't think it is enough.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> Too much bias in the question, for my taste. For example, I like HoT more than POF, but what if POF were as profitable to farm as HOT is? Then suddenly it becomes a whole different question. I think mounts have done more for the game over all than gliding and when I factor mounts in, even though I like HoT zones better, I like POF better, but that's not really an option in this poll.

>

> The problem is HoT metas are profitable and POF isn't profitable and because of that a lot of people are going to like HOT better. They say it's because of the metas but if the metas in POF has the kind of rewards Dragon Stand and AB had, it might be a whole different story.

>

> Over all, I think anything gleaned from this poll is bound to mislead. The bias is in the phrasing of the options.

 

I don't think the metas in PoF can really have the same amount of rewards as the HoT metas because the meta events of HoT are more involved, are mostly zone wide and last much longer. They are for the most part also more complex and challenging. Even Serpent's Ire, the so called "hard" meta of PoF is not really "hard", the only part that annoys everyone is breaking the bars of the Serpents and that's it. The last boss kills performance but not players. This is more likely because the meta events of PoF were designed around having a smaller team size and do not do a good job (see: none at all) at splitting the players. If Chak Gerent was one boss or if there was only one lane in Dragon's Stand then chances are they'd be as laggy and as terrible performance wise as Serpent's Ire. And even the meta that requires some splitting (Maw) the three paths are so close to each other that you can't really call it splitting, even Auric Basin requires more moving around to change lanes.

 

Further, to get the extra rewards during the HoT meta events you require map specific currency to buy map specific keys and open the extra chests. Again, something that prompts players to play around the zones more even outside meta events. PoF does nothing of the sort, so I don't think increasing the rewards of the PoF meta events is something that will ever happen (or that would make sense) unless the meta events themselves change drastically.

[Tails.9372]

Depends on the context:

 

utility stuff like mounts and the teleport device >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glider (also it wouldn't have been that bad if the glider skills from LWS3 EP1 weren't map exclusive)

 

In terms of map design: HoT maps >>>>>>>>>>> PoF maps

 

I especially liked how DS feels like a the gigantic OW raid (to bad both the boss fight and the rewards sucked). I just wish it would have been more easy to hop in and out like in SW. Bonus points for AB, TD and CO for having special meta themed infusion auras as possible event rewards (doesn't amount for much tho since their drop rates are way to low).

[ReaverKane.7598]

Didn't vote because none of the votes describe my position.

Basically i prefer the story of PoF, and enjoy the exploration, but it lacks the replay value of HoT and the metas.

Basically, with HoT they went too far by betting everything in map-encompassing meta events for every maps, and high difficulty hero challenges.

Then learning the bare minimum from their mistakes, with PoF they went the complete opposite way, with extremely casual maps that lack proper difficulty and replay value.

Basically i hope they find a middle ground for the next expansion, otherwise it'll flop harder than a fish on the hook.

[Plautze.6290]

> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> Sure! But you only mentioned the exploring part, which I thought was a little odd given that the HoT maps are an explorer's dream like no other game I've played before. Tangled Depths especially is packed with hidden pathways and objectives that you really have no choice but to find your way to without the aid of a map. It took me months to learn all of its secrets...and every once in awhile I still find a new one!

>

> PoF is a great playground for mounts, but it's basically core Tyria 2.0. The terrain has a lot of elevation change to accommodate mounts, but it's otherwise your basic straight-line-from-A-to-B flat map design where "exploring" consists of just walking toward objectives marked on the map.

>

> Anyway, I get you. It's not much fun if you can't handle the enemies. Although I'm surprised that PoF enemies don't give you trouble. They seem just as strong as HoT enemies to me, and more numerous with much larger aggro range. But then I suppose we have mounts now, which makes it easier to simply bypass them. Have you tried HoT since mounts were added? It might make a difference!

 

Surprise, I'm wandering the game per pedes unless I'm forced to use my mounts =) and to me, the majority of PoF enemies seem easier. The only exception are those Canids and the Awakened Abominations. (The Canids can at least be cc locked).

But please get me right, I adore TD for all the reasons you mentioned, but in the beginning got owned badly by Chak and mushrooms alike. It just wasn't fun at that time and might have tainted my memories. Anyhow, I'm on the verge of sending other alts to the Heart of Maguuma.

 

But as of now, having played PoF left a fonder memory than having played HoT did back in the day.

So, as of now, my vote goes towards PoF. Still gonna play both with my alts ;)

[Ashantara.8731]

**I miss the 4th option: I prefer a mixture of several aspects from all campaigns.** ;)

 

Edit: I selected PoF only to show my support for the improvements in story-telling and dialogue writing that the game has taken with PoF and - especially - LWS4. :+1:

[ProverbsofHell.2307]

As someone who has played a HUGE amount of games from many genres, including ones known for incredible map design like Dark Souls 1, I feel like I can safely say that Heart of Thorns, without a doubt, is the better expansion, and the maps are truly amazing and organic.

 

I can't stress that enough. Any critique of the HoT maps is simply because you're not that good at the game and can't appreciate being immersed and challenged.

[Gehenna.3625]

It really depends. If the maps had been somewhat less complex to move around in, I think more people would've reacted positively to HoT. On the other hand, once you figure out how some of these meta events work they are definitely more fun than the PoF meta's. Also the HPs in HoT were often not soloable for most people. So people couldn't just do their thing for map completion. I think that was a bad choice for the map completion side of things as well.

 

On the other hand moving through the HoT maps got a lot better once we got the PoF mounts :D Gliding was great but the mounts make exploring a lot more fun for me.