Dragon Age II is a polarizing experience. Based on online chatter, opinions seem evenly split. Some players love the more concise, structured gameplay, while others hate it. After two adventures through Kirkwall and the Free Marches, I find myself split between the two opinions. Andraste knows Dragon Age: Origins needed some trimming down. It was an amazing experience - one of my favorite, in fact - though it was still too bulky. Dragon Age II does a good job of trimming the fat, but it tends to cut out a little too much.

Although you're cast as a named, voiced protagonist (Hawke), you're still able to customize your character however you'd like. The options are just as robust as Origins, though customization ends with Hawke. Unlike Origins, companions are locked into a specific costume. Though it works for individual characterization, it removes the personal touch that made Origins a great game. Statistical elements aside, I loved the option of crafting my character's appearance. It was a fun option and I hate that it was replaced with something more impersonal.

Though opinions are split, the one thing everyone seems to agree on is the ridiculous amount of asset re-use. Levels are recycled to the point of boredom. Every time you step into a dungeon, you'll see the same dull textures and bland structures. There are no great dwarven halls of Orzammar or Ruined Temple of Andraste. Instead, you get a bunch of generic hallways with certain doors blocked off to create the illusion you're in a new place. It's lazy and comes across as a rush job.

Voicework is impressive, though I've come to expect nothing less than excellence from Bioware when it comes to casting. Dialogue isn't always well written and female Hawke is a bit of an ice queen, though everyone else sounds great, especially Varric. Music, on the other hand, shares a lot in common with levels. There's no sweeping theme or anything, just a lackluster collection of drums and horns.

Dragon Age II is told as a framed narrative. After choosing a male or female version of one of three classes - warrior, thief or mage - you're immediately thrust into the middle of a bloody battle between your character and a horde of Darkspawn. Eventually you discover the story is just that, a story told by a dwarf, Varric, to a member of the Chantry.

As it turns out, you are the eventual Hero of Kirkwall, and the Chantry, which is coming apart at the seams, needs your help. What isn't known, however, is how you became the Champion and, more importantly, where you end up. The framed narrative is one of Dragon Age II's better introductions. It's a cool device and cements your character into a world much better than the origin tales did. It leads to some cool moments and lends an epic feel to a not-so-epic story.

On the other hand, the rigid structure robs Dragon Age II of the emotional story ties experienced in Origins. The framework doesn't allow for Origins' sense of freedom. Hawke has some choice as to how to navigate through the story, though choices are pre-determined by specific plot points. The same was true with Origins, but at least you had some influence on the outcomes of specific points (for example, choosing the werewolves over the elves). Here, there are times where Hawke is forced into a decision, sometimes with a half-hearted, "I guess I have no choice."

With the exception of ones relating to the main story, quests are dumped on players with little build-up or fanfare. Moments happen, resulting in mechanical, emotionless plot points. You'll either get a letter or talk to someone, pointing you towards one of a handful of maps. From there you kill a few monsters, find whatever you were looking for and get your reward. The structure is common for the genre, but with so few areas to explore, it becomes a repetitive grind. Most of the time, you're just checking off tasks from a list. That's not to say there aren't a few interesting quests to tackle, but most feel like random occurrences.

There are attempts to tie some scattered quest elements into the major, over-arching storyline, though the end goal feels just as lost as the quest structure. Although the framed narrative provides a touchstone, each act is more of a self-contained episode. There's very little build-up or indication of an ultimate goal. Instead, a bunch of loose story threads somehow weave into a bigger story. As much as I loved the sense of time (I even "aged" my character, so there was some connection to the story), I would have liked a more cohesive story or a better sense of direction.

Battles are more strategic than it initially appears, though it took a thumping by a giant dragon for me to catch on. Although presented as an action-oriented system, combat is still limited by the same mechanics as other turn-based systems. It just so happens that turns and cooldown periods are much faster. It's tempting to charge into battle, furiously mashing away with your weapon of choice. However, this is also a fast track to a reload, or at least a shortage of Injury Kits.

Though combat is faster than most RPGs, you still need to think tactically. However, this isn't always enough. Enemy mobs can, and will, appear out of thin air. I don't mind being ambushed, but it should happen within reason. Three or four new enemies are okay, but the game will routinely drop as many as ten new enemies at one time. Worse, the newcomers are usually stronger than your original foes.

As far as I can tell, the system is meant to keep you on your toes and challenge you to shift tactics. It's great idea, but it doesn't work. The constant barrages of new enemy waves and combat mechanics aren't compatible. I compare it to a football game where you're limited by rules and a set number of players, while the other team has an endless roster and play however they want. At some point, it becomes absurd and frustratingly tedious.

You'll notice Mass Effect 2's DNA throughout Dragon Age II. The most obvious is the dialogue tree, which is lifted straight out of Commander Shepard's adventure except for an icon indicating context. At the outset, the indicator hamstrings your choices, limiting you to "Boy Scout," "Smartass" or "Rageaholic" responses. However, the system isn't that simple, though you have to understand the revamped "morality" system to fully appreciate how it works.

The idea of "Good" and "Evil" are tossed out in favor of individual feelings towards Hawke. Rather than following strict alignments, companions have their own moral compasses. Sometimes choosing the "Tough" option, which looks like the "bad guy" response, is better than going for the "Good" option. It's all about how your companions view the world. The system makes sense and is a good idea, but is half-baked. It's hard to tell exactly where certain companions fall on certain topics. You can usually guess right, though sometimes their reaction will fall completely out of character.

Your choices, or rather how companions see those choices, will affect how some plot points play out, but results are slapdash and unremarkable. To start, characters aren't interesting. In Origins, everyone had a stake in what was happening. Character's goals would often interfere with your own, creating conflict. Having to navigate group politics was part of the fun. Here, characters all live their own lives. There's some interaction, but it is mostly just for flavor. It's possible to run off some party members, though most goals line up perfectly with your own. There are no tough decisions and, chances are if a character runs off, you were probably ignoring them.

If you go into Dragon Age II expecting Origins, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. Despite the negative tone and low score, Dragon Age II isn't a terrible game - it's just not as good as Origins. Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening showed signs of the series' turn towards the model used in Mass Effect 2. Dragon Age II completes that transformation. But, as usual, what works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other. Some of the changes are for the better, though the improvements aren't much of a trade-off for what you're losing.