NateOwnage NateOwnage

Failed to Initialize Display

▼

Failed to Initialize Display

from PolMach Forums


I'm getting this when I go to play for the first time. HELP?!
36,221 views 65 replies
Reply #51 from PolMach Forums Top
Ok, i bought my computer in 2002
its a Gateway Profile 3T
its operating system is Windows XP Home Edition, its Pentium III
i am not a computer guy, so i have to tell you i have no idea what this stuff means. If you want to know something specific, just ask.

Reply #52 from PolMach Forums Top
I have an hp pavilion 7940 with pentium 3, Windows ME, an intel 82810E graphics controller with 5.5 megs.

I followed all the other steps, and finally got the game to "start" using the directory/dos screen approach. However, there is no text... the graphics themselves seem fine... just no text.

Any ideas?
Object Desktop - Get all of our enhancement utilities in one suite
Reply #53 from PolMach Forums Top
What do you mean by starting it from the DOS screen approach? You ran it in a window?
Reply #55 from PolMach Forums Top
Ghost - yea, the problem seems to be the Intel 82810E graphics chipset.  We're trying to get one so we can see what the deal is with that chipset.
Reply #57 from PolMach Forums Top
guys, as he said, only post here for the failed to initialize thing so we can make his help more efficient.

frogboy, do you just want everyone who has this problem to give you their complete computer type? if so, i have that 64 mb card, pentium 4. what else?
Reply #58 from PolMach Forums Top
Hey Frogboy,

I have a 82815 graphics controller in a Viao laptop with XP Pro. I am having the same problem described by fairUNbalanced. Let me know if I can provide anymore information to help get this problem solved. Thanks for your help.

-SB
Reply #59 from PolMach Forums Top
I have the same "unable to initiate display" message. I have the latest video driver, directx 9, latest patch, and 512mb ram. Normally I use 1024x786 32bit colors. But for this game I've tuned it down to 16bit and even 256 colors. It still gave me the same message even with the "w" parameter. Another thing I have tried is changing the DeviceType= number in .ini file. no effect. I don't see why this game can't run on my system since even doom3 runs. Judging from the screenshots everything is 2d! A 2mb video card should be able to support the type of graphics used in this game! Why would you use the video ram so inefficiently? just to make the game seem cutting edge? That's not very smart at all since you lose a big market share. BTW the create new account button on this site doesn't even work(perhaps intentionally disabled to filter out the error reports). I had to view html source to get the link . This problem has wasted enough of my time. I can't deal with this. I'm returning the game today.
Reply #61 from PolMach Forums Top

glasnost - yea, that's it, we wanted to look cool.  All the cool kids were doing it...

Going 3D cut down the development time in half and allowed us to implement things such as zooming, on the fly rotations, more fluid animations, and cut the base memory use down considerably since things could be rendered rather than done as merely sprites. 

And 3D allows the entire experience to be vastly more fluid.  And it does work on pretty much all the video cards out there.  It's just a couple of particular chipsets, mainly the older on board Intel chipset and some older or low end laptop ones. 

As others have pointed out, the game's engine isn't that taxing. But we don't know which particular API that these particular video adapters don't support.

Reply #62 from PolMach Forums Top
Frogboy,

I have been getting that error message (see my above posts), but I am still curious as to why you would build a strategy based game with such high graphics standards. Lord of the Rings, Tron 2, C&C - these are all game types that consumers expect high-quality graphics out of. I realize C&C is strategy, but it is a strategy game with much on-screen fighting and other "graphic" events. A political game that doesn't even show handshakes on the screen should not be required to have similar graphics. An all-2D would be more than acceptable to the vast majority of your consumers, because virtually no one expects flashy graphics in a political strategy game. I promise that unless you find a way to make these this game work on low-end graphics cards or integrated chipsets, you will lose far more customers than you would gain by maintaining this high requirements for graphics.
Reply #63 from PolMach Forums Top
Frogboy,

This isn't Doom, this isn't Lord of the Rings or Tron, this even't even High Heat Baseball. This is a game whose consumers do not expect nearly as high-quality graphics as those games, and that's a problem you guys need to fix. If this game can't run on integrated graphics controllers, you are losing far more consumers than you would gain by maintaining your high graphics standards. This is a political strategy game, not an action or military game.
Reply #64 from PolMach Forums Top
Okay.

I'm about burned out on this subject myself, so I will define "complex animations". I was rather hoping you'd know what I meant by complex animations.

My definition of 'complex animation' with regard to previous mentioned games as an example: Grand Theft Auto, 1942, Rise of Nations and Morrowwind and Knights of the Old Republic..

All of these games have common denominators. They have "detailed" individual animations. RoN has individual units that move about on a map, So does C&C. 1942; Individual fully mobile human like figures in an interactive environment and that environment also being interactive, rain, snow, explosions, vehicle movements of various types,etc.
I should mention to be further clear..I understand totally these games needing a powerful video card, a lot of memory or in some cases, a Pentium 4 or all the above.

Okay, with that said. Political machine, when compared to either of these games as example, do NOT have these complex animations. Not even close.

I actually don't think it matters what computer the rest of us have. I have a gateway, myself that's 3 years old. For all I know, most of these guys that posted after me may have built their own computer, I don't know, But it's a possibility.

As for Intel chipsets. I don't think the fault lies with the Intel chipsets. Intel chipsets were here before Stardoc, why didn't you make the game with the intel chipsets so the apparent lower class video card peasants like myself can play the game that we shelled out 20 dollars for??

I have a lot of games that run fine without problem on the Intel chip.Although I have bought more memory to make sure it all runs without a skip.

What I can't get my mind to grasp apparently is why was the bar set so high for this game? Its not like the intel chipsets were a secret from you or anything. I just think you guys just passed it up. a 'let them eat cake' scenario. If that's not true then, well..sorry, but it sure does feel like that.

Earlier today, I spoke to my wife about this issue to get her opinion on it all and she described it to me as she saw it as putting a nuclear reactor on a already pretty fast sailboat. In short, you just don't need that powerful a Video card to run a pretty simple game.

When I did get a chance to look at the game within the last couple of days I didn't see a first person shooter combat mode with Kerry's Kung Fu Lawyers or Bush's Stealthy Ninja Campaign Managers going at one another that would have needed a expensive video card to run.

And as for the waiting longer as to find out why it doesn't work on the chipset, Frogboy, Why did you bother to release the game only to make the lot of us have to wait to find out why it doesn't work at all? Shouldn't you have done that already?

As far as keeping to topic, I have. I still get the "cannot initialize" message which leads us all to the video card.

Okay guys, I'm done with this subject. Nothing else can be done. That's all I got.
Reply #65 from PolMach Forums Top
Wow

I'd say a full scale revolt just broke out on this subject. Anyone want to help me pick up the battering ram?