The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim is a better RPG than Dragon Age: Origins

The Absolute Question.This debate hinges on what it means to be a good role-playing game, while many of my opponents points are quite relevant to what makes a good video game, only two of his points really constitute what makes a good role-playing game, in fact I am able to build my case by adding to what my opponent has said along with adding some more relevant points. I will be defending two points of contention:1.There are good reasons to think that Dragon Age Origins is a better RPG than Skyrim2.There are no comparably good reasons to think that Skyrim is a better RPG than Dragon Age Origins(I am doing my best to avoid spoilers, sorry if I reveal anything)1. Superior GraphicsI would to mention to my opponent while video games have popularized role-playing games and have made them easier to play anytime people wish to, it was not in the conception of role-playing, the quintessential role-playing game is Dungeons and Dragons and while the graphics are more realistic in that they portray reality more effectively, it has come at a cost of making less unique monsters(if Pro wishes more evidence of this, simply look at the quality and complexity of Morrowind's monsters by comparison), for example, Darkspawn are not based on anything specific they are evil creatures that are twisted by the Blight this in turn makes them less humanoid-like but this isn't a disadvantage, this is a advantage, it makes them less susceptible to lose the fantasy aspect. The improvement of graphics becomes necessary only when people want to actually buy the game as a video game but it really doesn't effect role-playing capability therefore graphics are irrelevant to actual role-playing games.2.Linear? I beg to differMy opponent is making a absolutely false statement when she says Skyrim is non-linear and Dragon Age is by comparison. In Skyrim, after getting out of Helgen, it may be true you can avoid the main quest if you wish, but what would be the point? If you never do the main questline, you never see a dragon hence discovering dragon words which is a main point of the game, becomes trivial. Furthermore, if you do not complete attempt to do part of the main questline you end up losing tons of quests in the process that were not apart of the main questline if you are not a certain class. For example, in order to get into the College of Winterhold you need to cast a apprentice level spell or demonstrate your Th'uum(dragon shout). However, if you happen to be a non-mage without doing the main questline good luck getting that(admittedly fun) questline. Furthermore, Dragon Age is not at all linear in the sense my opponent supposes. The Darkspawn invasion is progressive in the sense in progresses WITH QUESTS, so theoretically(and in reality 99% of the time), one ends up doing what they want before the Darkspawn get anywhere. The game allows the player to achieve relationships while also showing that certain things are bound to happen which is a prime aspect of role-playing game, circumstances beyond ones control happen all the time. Simply put this is a simple illustration, as almost all RPGs are, a example of fatalism.3.Open World/Random BattlesMy opponent makes a definite good point, open world seems to be a key aspect of role-playing games. The problem with this is Skyrim isn't truly a open world. It really is a essentially collection of rooms just like Dragon Age. You see while it seems like Skyrim is open, think about this, when was the last time you jumped Whiteruns wall? All cities are interior cells not exterior cells, with a couple of small exceptions(towns). Furthermore, Skyrim makes it so insanely easy to be lazy regarding fast travel it removes the exploration feature in all practical terms. There are many ways to fast travel in simple non-fast travel terms, like using the carriage. Or another way would be to get on a horse, my opponent might say its still traveling and exploration but on a horse you can run away from everything and nothing harms you really. It is fast traveling effectively slowly. Dragon Age instead makes fast-traveling mandatory BUT at least the Random Battles are conceivable and are often important to the storyline, Dragon Age almost never has a pointless random encounter. All the Random battles serve as helper to the storyline.4.Increased Control over Levels(facepalm) You will gain experience all you want but you never level up automatically, if my opponent means you advance to the next level from the character sheet then I concede this point but SKYRIM DOES THE SAME THING. To illustrate the example I will use the smithing "skill". I can go to Whiterun and use the smith stuff to level fifteen times(exaggeration) and I may choose not to level. But what's the point? I still have enough experience points to level. With regards to Dragon Age, there is a option to auto level, but its irrelevant because you have to actively to choose to do it. Furthermore, choosing not to get your talents is rather pointless anyway. While I am on the this point, I would like to point out that leveling in Dragon Age gives you much more choice, I can choose what to put attributes in, what skills I want to have( every 2 to 3 levels), and spells/talents which are much more prominent in gameplay. In fact some of skills are counter intuitive, the smith skill is a excellent example of this, because the creatures are leveled, if you use smithing too much the game punishes you by killing you off with harder creature then necessary, and considering this is for using the skills it is not helpful.1. My singular point of contentionDragon Age has many characteristics that make it superior to Skyrim. But I will summarize it as a argument.If Dragon Age gives you more choices, it is a better RPG than SkyrimDragon Age gives you more choicesTherefore Dragon Age is a better RPG than SkyrimThe first premise seems obvious, aside from fantasy, the major point of RPG's is the choices made and their effects, everything else is secondary. In fact, the whole reason people play RPG's is because they are looking for a experience in someone elses shoes. The major point of doing that is to make choices in the person's body. There is distinction that needs to be made first, between major and minor choices. Major choices have a effect on the character and the world, minor have no real effect. Skyrim seems to be riddled with minor choices but not really major ones, the whole game is relatively linear. When was the last time you persuaded Mercer Frey to step down willingly? I cannot remember, oh wait.. Furthermore, have you ever prevented the death of half of your friends in the Dark Brotherhood? Me either. The point is that the game makes you make choices in bulk and if you do not choose to do something then the consequences are minimal. Here's what I mean, you can exterminate the Dark Brotherhood or join them but after that the next choice is whether or not to kill Cicero which has zero effect whatsoever. Dragon Age is much different, you can even go into a Dalish girls tent without pissing someone off(sorry Leliana:) ). And the fact is that all choices have some effect on the world around you in Dragon Age. Even the choice to do summoning in the Mages tower has some effect. The point of RPG's is to show choices matter and Dragon Age illustrates this much more elegantly than Skyrim. Skyrim is the illusion of choice, Dragon Age is the actual choice or at least what constitutes real choice in the real world. Another aspect is the flavor and uniqueness of NPCS/companions but we will get into that later.ConclusionThe origin stories, the immense amount of choice, uniqueness in NPCS and the commitment to true role-playing makes Skyrim look poor in comparison."After all, no one wants to hear 'Willy toiled for many a year to perfect the curious mechanisms that would send a sharpened spike up the arse of the unwary intruder." Brother Genitivi