Which expansion did you like the most, HoT or PoF?

Heart of Thorns was released on October 23, 2015. Path of Fire was released on September 22, 2017. Now, months (if not years) later, we probably have enough clarity to be able to make an informed opinion about those two expansions.

Considering all aspects the main releases themselves - new features, new maps, the storyline, the specializations, etc (without the following seasons of the Living World) -, which expansion did you like the most? Heart of Thorns or Path of Fire?

I can't really decide. I loved PoF for what it was, mounts are incredible and kept me in the game, but I love and appreciate what HoT added to the game. Elite specs wasn't something I ever imagined would come to the game and they definitely added more to the game. Same with raids.

It's like Sophie's Choice for me. (I realize that the reference my blow over the heads of the game's widest demographic, but whatever.) I like exploring and the HoT maps are crazy good in that regard. Also the meta events are a plus, which PoF lacks. But on the other hand, PoF has the better story, introduced mounts and the LW season 4 is, I think, superior to season 3. as well-

To be honest I was caught in the first announcement by PoF but this decision is hard to make as HoT holds a kind of special place in my heart/memory. The only big con I have against it is the story and how it took its turn in the end. But that is only a personal opinion and doesn't need to be shared by others. I might be the only person alone with this I guess but that doesn't have to bother anyone else. It doesn't bother me at all that everyone else might see things differently there.To be back on the topic: They are both overall good expansions with good and bad things here and there. Nothing is perfect but I can say for sure none of them is entirely bad. Both of them had interesting mechanics, features etc. as well as a good world design. The reason why I gave my vote for PoF was simply because how blown away I was during the live announcement and because I love my raptor <3Even if PoF isn't that popular I still give it a chance in the vote because I'm always rooting for the underdog as well.

PoF had a better story and big enjoyable maps, but I find it lacking in replayability especially on alts. HoT had a terrible and wasted opportunity for a story, but was very unique in map design and is very alt friendly. If HoT hadn't rushed out a bare bones story and maybe 1-2 more maps, it would have won it for me, but PoF did just enough to push ahead

Can there be an option for both? I loved both Xpacs! Each had something unique they brought to the table, whether it be story, new modes of transportation, or something I haven't seen before (Specs). Honestly, when HoT came out, the thrill of something new and exciting was just as powerful as when PoF came out years later. So, I love both; the Xpacs are two totally different experiences that I feel cannot be compared with each other. So thus, that's why I love them both, equally.

Needs a both option. I loved both of them because they each brought a different experience to the game. They are hard to compare to each other.

I don't think I could choose either, I like both for different reasons. And some of the same reason - I liked both stories for example.

I really like the way HoTs maps are designed - I know it's not easy to navigate but it's my favourite fantasy jungle in any game I've played and I love exploring it. I like doing the meta events and I even like that they have such a big impact on the maps. It sometimes bothers me that if this wasn't a game and they didn't award loot, achievements and other things the best way to deal with a lot of the 'threats' in core Tyria would be to ignore them until they timed out and left, whereas in HoT it actually feels like you're achieving something by clearing out the enemy and defeating the bosses - it has a real, tangible impact for us as players. I like a lot of the elite specs too, including some I wasn't expecting to enjoy like druid.

I like PoF for different reasons - there's more NPCs to talk to and more of a sense of history to the maps so I enjoy exploring them for entirely different reasons to the HoT ones, and I like that I'm free to do it in my own time. I really enjoy the mounts. I was always one of the people who said this game didn't need mounts (and I still don't think the game needs them) but I was really impressed with how Anet did it - I hadn't imagined mounts which can go up vertical walls or teleport you and although the griffon is more restrictive than flying mounts in some other games I actually think that makes it more fun to use.

I realise some of that seems contradictory - like enjoying meta events which affect what's available on the map whilst also liking to be able to explore solo in PoF, but it's because I like doing different things at different times. My main criticism of both expansions is that they were too focused on one type of content - I'd have preferred a variety of maps in each one, some more solo friendly or simply less hectic, and some with big map-wide meta events that change everything.

@"Cat Warrior.9240" said:Can there be an option for both? I loved both Xpacs!

Nope :p

The lack of a "I like them both equally!" (or a "I dislike them both equally") option has been on purpose; I think a lot of people would have rushed to that option instead of stopping to think about the question.

If you really, really like them both equally, you can always just post it here :)

overall HoT gameplay is higher quality the masteries had much better flavor for the content the maps had more going on the average enemy encounter was more difficult and the events lead into eachother making a smoother more engaging experience.

storywise i'd rate then evenly until the end PoF had a much more satisfying ending.

i think the big takeaway for me was mounts are top tier and i really like them but once the story is over PoF gameplay just isn't engaging on the level HoT gave us it really feels like going through the motions rather than desperate survival against the god of war the crystal dragon and the lich king of elona all at the same time whereas HoT had one enemy who was terrifying till the last mission.

This poll, like others said, needs more options. I thought HoT didn't come close to justifying its price but I like its metas and their replayability. And I think PoF map design is far better than Hot, I enjoyed mounts but I don't think its maps have any replay value. So what do I pick?

@Erasculio.2914 said:

@"Cat Warrior.9240" said:Can there be an option for both? I loved both Xpacs!

It was more of a rhetorical question, :D just asking for the sake of asking. But anyways, yes, that is why I put my answer of "both" in the comments section!

What about "The unreleased PvP/WvW Xpac"?

HoT all the way. One of the biggest things that HoT has going for are it's Metas. Which, like world bosses, have specific times that they show up and they transition well into the next one and the one after. The maps themselves are also well done to me. I really enjoy the layered leves that they have (yes, even Tangled Depths). The story itself, to me, felt more driven as well. I never really knew why so many people griped about it. To me it was done really well.

I enjoyed PoF but I have no reason to really go back there. The maps are nice but even after coming on two years I haven't finished map completion on at least 2 of them. The story was great as well and I enjoyed the back story we got with Ritlock. The worst thing about PoF is that they really have no major meta events to go to. People will farm the board bosses on occasion but that's about all.

I hope that with the next expasion (if they're ever going to make a 3rd one (it didn't seem like it was something they planned to do but that was before the layoffs)) they will use what they've learned from these last two to make it truely epic. Since GW2 is the only thing Anet is working on now though the odds are a lot higher that they will bring in a 3rd expansion. I mean what else are they going to do besides the LS otherwise.

The ridiculous enemy aggro range of PoF single handedly ruins PoF for me.

@AlexxxDelta.1806 said:This poll, like others said, needs more options. I thought HoT didn't come close to justifying its price but I like its metas and their replayability. And I think PoF map design is far better than Hot, I enjoyed mounts but I don't think its maps have any replay value. So what do I pick?

I would say the qualifiers which are most important to you

How about a, "Neither, hate them both" option for the people who hate the power creep/over done elites both expansions ushered in and the damage they've done to both of GW2's competitive modes; PvP and WvW?

Pof has reeeally beautiful maps but I often find myself dealing with mobs from 20 miles away that I somehow aggro'd, rather than enjoying the scenery. Got annoyed way too many times to bother going back at all unless it's for collection. HoT maps are not as beautiful as Pof's I just don't like the jungle theme. BUT, the complexity of the maps that turns people off is why I like going back. It was fustrating to figure out at first but you eventually just remember where everything is. That's of course on top of the meaningful, large scaled meta events that HoT has. PoF meta events don't have the same epic feeling I get from doing the HoT ones.

I guess I would have to choose PoF because of Mounts which are the greatest thing that has happened to this game imo. However not counting this expansion specific feature, it would definately be HoT for me. HoT is just more intense, I like the jungle better then the desert, I like the verticality, I like the meta's that run for longer periods of time.

HoT for gameplay reasons. PoF for story reasons.

No i will not be caught up in the game of picking my favorite child.

Mounts are awesome and fit in well. But HoT was much more challenging and is very replayable. The event building upon each other gives the sense of moving something forward to an event. I can't remember last time I was back in the PoF maps outside of LS4 maps, also didn't get that feeling that I needed to explore all the corners like I did in HoT.

Would have picked none. Both are at the same level for me, because the pros from one are the cons of the other.

HoT:

• Gliders
• Great main story and lore
• Very nice metas, every meta is great as its own kind. Regent is the better for me.
• Poor Living Story Maps and confusing maps
• Meh specs

PoF:

• Mounts
• Awesome ls maps with unique content and story similar to core. (Cf death branded destroyer, specimen chamber, palawadan and great hall....)
• Very cool especs design. (Holosmith, Scourge, Weaver, Dragonhunter......)
• Poor main story, really basic (omgosh dah fak god gone mad... the awful glint lair..)
• No sense metas, not catching at all, annoying bounties....

To sum up, would like:Stunning environment ls maps with great metas + cool especs design + hot meta events in main e maps + solid story and lore (can be dragon but not as a priority: more like finding quora sum for asuras, charr homelands exploration etc.. developing the origin of a race and their cultures.)

And even if Rata Novus was closer to that inciting muself to vote for HoT, will keep PoF due to ls maps and mounts.

As much as I loved PoF, HoT was just more enjoyable for me. I didn’t play HoT until a few months after I played PoF, and even though I found PoF to be really exciting and especially with mounts, I thought HoT maps were a lot more fun to explore and the achievements and rewards felt more worthwhile to me.

I vastly prefer forest/jungle theme compared with desert.

However...

• I prefer the horizontal design of pof maps compared to the excessive verticality in hot (mainly verdant brink which I don't like due to this)
• I prefer the pof enemies compared with hot (eg I hate those tendrils in hot, just not fun to fight - whereas I enjoy the sand sharks, eels, hyrda etc).
• all pof maps are accessible not locked behind metas (eg Dragon's Stand is a waste of map - I'd only ever go there again to farm crystalline or if ever wanting to build another gen 2 legendary, but otherwise hate the meta event and have no desire to go there).

I love Auric Basin and Tangled Depths, but don't like Verdant Brink or Dragon's Stand.

For pof I like Desert Highlands, Crystal Oasis, Elon Riverlands and Vabbi - it's only Desolation I don't like too much.

So pof is more fun from gameplay point of view - the maps, the enemies, the events etc. Even though thematically I prefer the jungle of HoT.

Edit: adding some things:

• gliding is great but mounts are more fun
• prefer pof elite specs to hot
• prefer pof stat configurations to hot

Very difficult for me to answer. Basically I appreciate things from both, but also dislike things from both. If I was to pick one I liked better it would be HoT since I've enjoyed it more. But at the same time, HoT was the end of WvW for me, when fights got dull and boring, and powercreep took over, and PoF certainly didn't help there.

So for PvE I'd answer Hot. For WvW, I'd say gimme back Core.