The Traditional Ultima
Parcival, 2003-10-13

Although I disagree to both idea's, I am not going to thoroughly discuss them, but I would like to spend a few thoughts on the Ultima tradition. Is there such thing as the Ultima tradition? And if so; what belongs to it, and what not?

There sure is an Ultima tradition. Tradition is about continuing and handing over of the customs of -in this case- a certain type of game making. Tradition is not only about transmission (you only need players and publishers for that), but also about the continuous development of games with the same label. Because of this continuous development the canonical basis of the Ultima tradition is by definition subject to change. And change (oh horror) will be embraced by the neophiles and loathed by neophobes. Who of the two groups is right is decided by the course that history takes - or the majority of the fans if you like a more prosaic explanation.. Maybe it is to soon to tell, but I would like to present you a few things, is that are probably no essential part of the Ultima tradition.

There is no need for an traditional Ultima to be made or published by Richard Garriott or Origin. No, stop! You don't have to disagree with me yet: this was already proven by the existence of Ultima Underworld I and II. And by now, Richard Garriott moved on beyond Ultima and Origin is a part of Electronic Arts. If that was the end of it, there would be no Ultima tradition: there would only be Ultima history.

Of course both Origin and Garriott were essential to founding the tradition, but as with most traditions the founder is not essential for continuance. There is Bond without Ian Flemming and Cthulu Mythos without H.P.Lovecraft.

Some other thing that are often referred to as an essential part of a true Ultima are the companions, the virtues and the fact it were single player games. These game elements are (or were at one time) very important parts indeed. But the companions and the virtues were introduced with Ultima IV and the previous ones had to do without them. And even if you think UO is not real, the Ultima Legacy has shown that it is very well possible to have a 'real' Ultima that is not a single player game.

'Well then, what makes a game a real Ultima?' you might ask.
Except for the Ultima label itself, there aren't many game element or features that all Ultima games share and this makes it nearly impossible to pinpoint one particular aspect and claim it to be an essential part of the Ultima tradition.

As with all things added through the years to Ultima, I think it is possible (not likely or preferable) to make an Ultima without them, but if you do so, you better have a damn good explanation for doing so.

Maybe one thing that finally makes a game with the Ultima label, the real look and feel of an Ultima-game is its power to suck you into the game. It should let you be the hero, let you live the legend.

With these three criteria in mind