Ultima Ultima-Where to begin?

[Meatpies]

As far as ultima goes, I haven't completed a single one;
I usually lock up when deciding which one is the best introduction to the series.
Many have told me the original "Age of Darkness" trilogy is not worth my time,
and that I should begin straight from Ultima 4.
However even Ultima 4 seems archaic.
is it best to stick it out with that game, or start somewhere later, like 7?

 

[Stabwound]

I'd personally start with 4, but I find it cool to see how the world evolves over time. It's definitely archaic, though. I'd at least give it a try and see how you like it; if you don't like it at all, you probably won't enjoy 5 either, and in that case you might as well just play 7.

 

[Infinitron]

If you absolutely can't stand "archaic" games, then read a synopsis of Ultima IV online and then play the Ultima V: Lazarus and Ultima 6 Project mods for Dungeon Siege.

 

[IDtenT]

Start with 7 and play Underworld for something different.

 

[Gord]

If you absolutely can't stand "archaic" games, then read a synopsis of Ultima IV online and then play the Ultima V: Lazarus and Ultima 6 Project mods for Dungeon Siege.

 

[octavius]

Personally I found 6 and 7 more unplayable than 4 and 5. I used the Dungeon Siege mod for 6 and for 7 I read a Let's Play.
I'd recommend starting with 4.

 

[Meatpies]

If you absolutely can't stand "archaic" games, then read a synopsis of Ultima IV online and then play the Ultima V: Lazarus and Ultima 6 Project mods for Dungeon Siege.

The blow to my infinitesimal ego demands I play 4 now. I'll go with xu4 then.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I'd personally start with 4, but I find it cool to see how the world evolves over time. It's definitely archaic, though. I'd at least give it a try and see how you like it; if you don't like it at all, you probably won't enjoy 5 either, and in that case you might as well just play 7.

Isn't 5 much more sophisticated than 4?

 

[Stabwound]

Yeah, but not that much if you're playing with the VGA patch or xu4. I wouldn't say it improves enough upon U4 that someone would like U5 but not U4.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

I started with Akalabeth (aka Ultima 0). Promised myself to play all games in the series when I finish it.
Haven't finished it yet.

 

[Sceptic]

1-3 are very playable with the unofficial patches, 2-3 even get graphic upgrades to EGA, so it's very possible to start with 1 and work your way up. Watching the series evolve is very interesting. 1 and 3 are not bad games in their own right. 2 is a big mess and pretty much was RG throwing everything he could think of together with no idea of what he was doing, but I still think it's worth playing for the historical value if nothing else.

Skipping 4 is kinda stupid since it's one of the best games in the series, the most tightly and best designed one, still a unique game even so many years later, and aside from some UI annoyances (nothing worse than any 2013 game really) it's perfectly playable. With xu4 the "archaic" aspects pretty much vanish, unless you mean graphics.

 

[Elzair]

I say start with Akalabeth & work your way from there. The first 3 games are fairly short, so even if you don't like them, you won't have to play them for long. Then you will get that sense of completion upon finishing the entire series.

 

[Gragt]

I started with Akalabeth (aka Ultima 0). Promised myself to play all games in the series when I finish it.
Haven't finished it yet.

You can start it and finish it in 15 minutes, maybe less.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

I started with Akalabeth (aka Ultima 0). Promised myself to play all games in the series when I finish it.
Haven't finished it yet.

You can start it and finish it in 15 minutes, maybe less.

Unless you fall into some trap in the dungeon.

 

[Xavier0889]

4 or 7. 1 Can be too archaic and weird for you (see Spoony's review on that), 5 and 6 kinda require you to play 4 for plot reasons. 8 might be a good start if you like Diablo. Leave 9 until you have played most of the games of the regular series.
Try the Worlds of Ultima as well, they're free on GOG (just like U4) and they're very nice to play.
If you dig Daggerfall, try Ultima Underworld.

 

[:Flash:]

IMO Ultima IV is definitely the place to start. It is the first game where you play yourself and stumble into Britannia by accident. Unfortunately, this was retconned in the later parts so that these presume Ultima I-III were also played by yourself.
This is what sets Ultima apart from so many other RPGs. By playing as yourself, the story becomes much more personal. It is not just a story that you play, like a book that you read, the immersion is so much greater.

I discovered Ultima IV (my first RPG ever) somewhere around 2001. And even though at that point I had played a lot of (modern) games before - since the middle of the 90s - Ultima IV was better than almost everything I had played until then. And it is still a better game than all the crap released today.
I also wrote a gamehost review on Hotu for it.

 

[Unkillable Cat]

I also wrote a gamehost review on Hotu for it.

I thought your username was familiar. Then I saw the avatar on HOTU and recognized it instantly.

 

[:Flash:]

I also wrote a gamehost review on Hotu for it.

I thought your username was familiar. Then I saw the avatar on HOTU and recognized it instantly.

The Unkillable Cat. When Iceland's banks collapsed I remembered your predictions.
I think I didn't pay enough money to the Codex gods to use my old Avatar here. Which - to get back on Topic - is from the manual of Ultima I.

 

[octavius]

Yeah, but not that much if you're playing with the VGA patch or xu4. I wouldn't say it improves enough upon U4 that someone would like U5 but not U4.

The main improvement was the combat system and encounter design, IMO. Combat system is more tactical and there's random encounters only at night.
In addition there are fewer, but more detailed NPCs, and they have schedules.
But if you play U5 without playing U4 first I think you'll miss a lot.

 

[Daemongar]

I'd also back it up that U4 is the place to start, and if you can do it, play it with a notebook in lap and not a walk-through. While it seems archaic and may seem clunky, its a highly esteemed and commonly referenced game. If not that game, play U9. It is arguably the most modern and graphic intensive of the Ultima games. Also, my friend, deep down who doesn't "Want to Par-tee?"

 

[:Flash:]

Are XU4's savegames compatible with Ultima V?
Otherwise I would strongly suggest using plain Dos Ultima IV in Dosbox, because Ultima V and VI allow character import from previous games.

 

[Absalom]

Go with 4. I don't think Aklabeth-3 add much to series honestly.

 

[BLOBERT]

BROS XU4 IS PRETTY COOL

I NEVER PLAYED THEM IN ORDER BUT I LIKED 5 BETTER FOR MANY REASONS THE WORLD AND THE COMBAT SORTA PEAKED

3 IS FUN FOR THE NINTENDO LOLLOLLOL I ADMIT THAT IS THE ONLY VERSION I PLAYED

I DID FINISH 1 IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS AND IT WAS A PAINLESS AND FUN EXPERIENCE

 

[Baron]

Play IV or post somewhere else.

 

[taxalot]

If Ultima IV seems archaic, try the NES version ; it's a lot better.