Talk:What is Ultima?

Notes on editing this page

I just wanted to point out that this article is supposed to be the first education that a completely Ultima-ignorant visitor gets, so feel free to go into a little more depth, but let's not make our readers drink from the fire hose. The Ultra-Mind (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Finale could be improved

"Consequently, in recent times, the name has stagnated, however, the Ultima universe has continued in spirit, most recently in Garriott's Shroud of the Avatar."

Shroud of the Avatar seems to have been declining lately, but I would like to see the sentence salvaged, just w/out that albatross around this article's neck.--The Ultra-Mind (talk) 14:44, 17 January 2025 (MST)

Besides that, I've always found the way this page is written to be a bit bitter in tone and confusing. First, it wasn't the Ultima brand alone that was sold to EA, but Origin as a whole, though agreed, that is not that critical. But second, the article implies that, after 1992, no Ultima games came out, when Ultima VII Part 2, Ultima VIII, Ultima Online and Ultima IX came after that year. It can be reworded a bit to make it clearer without too much information and bitterness. I may take a stab at it. --Sega381 (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2025 (MST)

The problem w/saying U9 was the last is that it wasn't: don't forget Underworld Ascendant. I wish I could, but the fact is, it released under license, so we need to be more vague about what happened after EA took over. If it sounds too bitter, then I guess it could be changed, but it should also be factual.

I also added a legacy section, but it only has 1 point. I'm sure there could be more. As I understand it, 3D dungeons is something that's been crowed about but I don't know what should be said about it here. Having a few symbols that are depicted in the games wasn't the greatest choice. I added box art and screenshots, but I'm sure there are a few things about it that can be improved.--The Ultra-Mind (talk) 14:50, 18 January 2025 (MST)

The legacy section looks like a nice addition, and we probably can add more things. I'll think about it. I agree that it looks better with those additions.

Fair point about Underworld Ascendant. I had completely forgotten about it. We could get around that by simply stating that Ultima IX was the last in the main series of games, or even stating that it was the last one for more than a decade, or something along those lines. Thinking about it, more than the tone, the main issue I have with " Shortly after, EA’s interest" coming after "the sale in 1992" is that too many games came after the sale. 1999, which is the year after which more than a decade passed without any attempts, is too far away from 1992 to say "shortly after", in my opinion. Maybe something like this: "Released in 1999, Ultima IX was the last game in the series for over a decade", or "Released in 1999, Ultima IX was the last game in the main series". My main point is to try to avoid giving the impression that 1992 or 1993 is when the Ultima games dried out for a good while, since that is not the case.--Sega381 (talk) 16:36, 19 January 2025 (MST)

The reason why I had that line there in the first place, was that I wanted the reader to understand that this is an historical wiki and then the Millennials would understand why they've never heard of it: it reached its zenith before some of them were even born. That's why it's unheard of on Steam (with one exception), that's why no one's talking about it on TikTok, that's why all the YouTube videos about it have such cheezy graphics. Some of these changes would change the purpose of that text. But maybe the use of the word "zenith" could satisfy all 3 problems: telegraphing the age of the game, correctly laying down facts and w/out sounding bitter.--The Ultra-Mind (talk) 08:47, 20 January 2025 (MST)

I understand your point, and I totally agree. My main gripe, again, is that "shortly after" is misleading in trying to explain that in the way it is written. Looking at it, the "bitterness" part is less than I thought at first, anyway. Give it a go with "zenith" and let's see how it looks like. --Sega381 (talk) 11:18, 20 January 2025 (MST)

Actually, using "zenith" invites other problems. When did it reach its zenith? I think we can all agree it was before U9 and after U6 but before or after EA took over? I thought U8 was a step down, but that opinion is probably too controversial. At least what's there now is sufficiently vague that people won't think Ultima completely expired after U7.5.--The Ultra-Mind (talk) 08:35, 21 January 2025 (MST)

Yes, the way it is written now is good enough. I agree that trying to more precisely define its zenith is an exercise in futility, and a subjective appreciation anyway. You could try to measure that through sales, review scores, etc, but in the end, all would be an approximation. In any case, I think the way is worded right now is vague enough, but clear enough as to not mislead. Thanks! --Sega381 (talk) 09:25, 21 January 2025 (MST)