How to improve at "dull" games

So, right now, I have a really aggressive playing style. I think I'm pretty good at tactics during games, but considering my tactics rating is only a little over 1000, that might not actually be true. Positionally, though, I think I'm pretty bad at during games, but I might be wrong about that as well. The following game is an example of my agressive playing.

As you can see, very agressive on my part. But when I have no opening for an attack, and the game becomes "dull", for lack of a better word, I really don't know what to do, and I end up making errors, such as the following game.

Even when I don't make blunders in "dull" games, I feel like I either can't do anything, and eventually my opponent attacks me and I lose, or we slowly exchange pieces and eventually reach the endgame, and then I lose in the endgame. So how can I improve at my "dull", positional play, and be able to make good positional moves that set me up for a good endgame and don't leave me open to attack?

In the first game 4. Qe2 wins at least a pawn.

Nevertheless, you can't always win with a sacrificial attack on the opponent's king. Sometimes you just have to outplay him slowly - especially against stronger players, which don't do many simple tactical mistakes.

I struggle with that too sometimes.  It's become a mental challenge where I try to convince myself that it's the most interesting position in the world -- I just haven't unlocked it's secrets yet.  If I can get my brain in that mode, then the synapses usually start firing a lot stronger.

One way to improve on winning "dull" games would be to study endgames.

If your in a "dull game" and wandering what to do, just ask for a draw. You should not ask if you where already losing. So before than, and if it's still "dull" ask. Like equal chances.

Not to mention 12. Be5+ gets at least a rook for bishop! Good job finding the mate in 5, most impressive.

12. Be5+ is followed by 12... f3, and then I don't win any material. Unless I'm missing something.

You do not have 'a really aggressive playing style'.

You have a really foolish 'losing style'.

Maybe if he could learn to play more "passively" would improve his game. A "dull" game, becomes an opportunity to study the other player's plans and take advantage of their mistakes and aggression as they lose patience.

Well when your opponent completely disregards any semblance of opening theory by move 3 what do you really expect? In positional play just try and give your opponent and isolated pawn and bank a knight behind it.

That's really going to help! hehe. 

Try thinking about the game and your opponent's ideas instead maybe...

I know this isn't answering your question but in the 2nd game you could have made it more lively and attacking with the good gambit 2. Nf6 and in the text after 5. c3, d5! was a livelier, more punishing option. Your move 5... Bc5 seems good restraining White from playing d4 but you've already pushed g6 (White was so kind as to let you do it with tempo) so the Bishop belongs on the good square g7... in the game your dark square weakness from moving the Bishop away from that post was part of your downfall (I talked this variation over some back when everyone was trolling about 2. Qh5 on this site: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/parham-attack-as-white-2?page=2 even advocated of that system don't think 5. c3 is playable in that position.) In general you should try not to play an early g6 unless you're planning to put your Bishop on g7 because it weakens the dark squares on the Kingside.

Agreed

Why?

Becuase if the game is 'dull' winning the endgame is not going to negate 'dullness' is it??

There are dull-games and they remain that win or lose.

The game does not all of a sudden become 'exciting' simply because you won it Aggressive.

The part i bolded. It won't make the game exciting, but at least DreamTheater42 will have tools to help win the game.

If your definition of dull is a game that is more closed, more positional, not full of tactical combinations/sacrifices then you're going to become more disappointed the better you get.

The higher you get in the rantings the more you will experience those "dull" games because your opponents will be strong enough to not leave you big tactical situations for you to gain an edge. You will have to work on small gains with positional play over many moves a lot of the time.

perhaps you're missing that black can not play f3 but f6!
Anyways, you are way to low rated to have any kind of playstyle. The games you play are mostly just a game of who makes the last blunder. 

2nd game. That 1334 played his best. You should be proud even you lost.

I have played some 1400s who came up with surprise moves. I don't remember the results, but they shocked me.

Everybody makes mistakes  Maybe it was my non-distinct avatar that threw him off?

I used the term "dull" because it is the opposite of "sharp", the term normally used to describe the types of games I normally strive to play, as well as because many people do find positional games boring. I myself don't find them boring at all, just confusing at times. And I'd expect if I got better at positional chess, I'd be less confused and enjoy it more.