Dragon Age 2 was a huge disappointment. While Dragon Age: Origins had some rough patches, some embarrassing design choices, and some bad writing here and there; it offered a great tactical and strategical combat system, that was ultimately a lot of fun to play around with. A lot of the side characters were interesting, and the voice acting was solid, but not great. Even still, it was a functional game, so I can't give it a failing grade or anything; but there are very few actually good things about it, or aspects of the game that were done well.
WHAT I LIKED THE MOST
The conversation system. One type of people I don't understand, is the type who say the dialogue options have been simplified compared to how they were in Origins. It's quite the opposite, if you ask me. Sure, the party members don't have as many lines, but Hawke has so much more dialogue than the Warden had. It's only that, just like in Mass Effect, the initial dialogue choice is incredibly short, and that alone makes it seem very dumbed-down. Anyway, what I think makes it so brilliant, is how Hawke's attributed 'default' attitude and personality, completely alters how conversations play out. Depending on if you've made Hawke into an aggressive, helpful, or humorous person, s/he will act accordingly all throughout the conversations - this includes the 'filler' dialogue options, as well as the investigative ones and the 'neutral' ones. Hawke will change the lines spoken through these options, to sound either aggressive and generally unfriendly, helpful and diplomatic, or humorous and sarcastic.
Not only that, but having an overbearing disposition to a specific personality, will also unlock unique conversation choices or actions. Renegade or Paragon interrupts, if you will, if you've played Mass Effect 2; but also the Humorous Hawke has an equivalent, in the form of spinning a tale or lying effectively, sort of adopting the sharp wit and ability to lie of Varric. Adding to this that your companions may also have their own 'interrupts,' if you have them along for certain quests or conversation, and the whole system is, I think, phenomenal. The replay value increases significantly, as it will feel like you're playing a whole new Hawke, if you change her/his personality this way.
WHAT I HATED THE MOST
The repetitive nature of the entire game. The first thing I noticed, was how every single interior type, was simply a copy/paste of any other interior of the same type. Every warehouse is identical, every cave is identical, and every place you go always ends up looking like a place you've already been. This is probably the most embarrassingly bad design decision Bioware has ever had. There's simply no excuse for employing this sort of lazy behaviour, effectively ruining one of the most important aspects of any RPG: exploration.
The second example of the repetitive nature, is the incredibly stupid and annoying and utterly idiotic enemy wave system. Every single fight in the game was so insanely predictable: A group of weaker enemies, once you kill them, a group of somewhat stronger enemies spawn out of thin air to attack you from behind or surround you; once those are dead, the group of the strongest enemies spawn in the same manner. This is not only extremely ugly, it also ruins the thing that kept Origins feeling so interesting: Strategy. It's simply impossible to set up any sort of strategy, as the first wave is just trash that dies in one hit, anyway, and then the next wave(s) will ambush you, as they materialize out of nowhere right on top of you. I hate this design more than I do the identical interiors, and whoever pitched this idea should have immediately been shot down (not figuratively), and the idea scrapped from the start. This sort of combat behaviour is only somewhat excused in pure action games, where there's not much tactical planning involved; it's entirely inexcusable to include in a game like this.
MY CONCLUSION - 5/10
All in all, the game still works. It's mediocre most of the time, and sometimes it's even a bit good, and sometimes it's really bad. The conversation system kept me playing, and parts of the story had quality. The companions ranged from good (Aveline, Varric) to ridiculous (Fenris, Isabela), but were overall a much worse cast than that of DA:O. It deserves no awards in any category - heck, it doesn't even deserve to be nominated! - and I'm actually pleased to see that the majority of players agree with me, and are outraged at how they so completely destroyed a promising franchise. I can accept DA2 as a sort of spin-off game, but I am supposed to approve of it as a sequel to the original, carrying on the story of the first game, and that just doesn't sit right with me. It makes it so much worse than it really is. I felt the same way with Bethesda's Fallout 3 - as a spin-off game in the same universe, it is quite good and deserving of some praise, but as the third game of an already-established series, it's a blasphemer, in my book.