An update on Vortex development

[literallybyronic]

In response to post #54930308. #54930478, #54930773, #54930833, #54930843, #54930848, #54930913, #54931018, #54931133, #54931298, #54931363, #54931473, #54931588, #54932243, #54933863, #54934008, #54934293, #54934383, #54935133, #54936008, #54939378, #54939888, #54941398, #54945963, #54946478, #54947498 are all replies on the same post.

Kevin843 wrote: Like I said before no REAL virtual data=no using Vortex, I dont want my data folder messed up and ability to reorder mods is what makes MO2 the best mod manager. I am disappointed it is highly anticipated it will not have a virtual data like MO2. Hopefully there will still be community builds of MO2 for future Bethesda games. No way I can go back to installing mods to data folder now. I wont even bother using it if it dosent have these "Essential" MO2 features.

Zora wrote: I agree, not using a virtual file system is a step-back from what could be a huge improvement to mod managers we've seen so far. I still have high hopes for Vortex and will probably use it either way.

SarahTheMascara wrote: I agree. Keeping the data folder clean is essential for me as well. I have so many different builds for Skyrim and I'm jumping back and forth between profiles regularly.

BlueGunk wrote: From the interview with Tannin, 10 May 2017:

Robin: I think we both know the biggest questions we've received around Vortex have been in regards to virtualisation and how Vortex will handle and store files on people's hard-drives. Is Vortex going to use virtualisation?

Tannin: Yes it does.

I know people have - often very strong - opinions on the topic so I ask that you please read my reasons before you go to the comments and vent.

In the initial release of Vortex, virtualisation will be implemented using links (symbolic or hard links), similar to NMM v0.6. We've left the door open so we can implement different approaches (i.e. the usvfs library from Mod Organizer) but at this point I don't think there will be a "no virtualisation" option.

Dark0ne wrote: Thanks for your feedback.

If you're not interested in a mod manager that doesn't use MO's functionality VFS, that's fine. But this is about Vortex, not MO.

I'll be deleting any more comments that follow this line of thought as it's completely irrelevant to what I've talked about in this news article.

Yggdrasil7557 wrote: There are many reasons for this, Tannin is the original developer of mod organizer, and he was one of the people who decided not to use virtual filing. the new program will feature mod managing methods similar to how mod organizer currently works, the file managing will be able to work in many the same ways that mo does, the only difference is that it will actually place the files in the correct locations, this is for the same reason that el presidente gave up on mo2, the crashes due to virtual filing, especially in 64 bit are far too complex. for more info go read all previous posts about vortex, including the post where tannin said he was discontinuing development of mo1

Valyn81 wrote:

Remember that it is not the same thing as the old NMM did, corrupting your data folder easily.

TanninOne is helping them make the new Vortex, so you know Vortex will have some aspect of MO2 in order to help minimize data folder corruption.

*EDIT*
Seems BlueGunk, Yggdrasil7557, and I all have the same thought at about the same time, lol.

:wub:

 

Here is the link to help the people with Facts about Vortex and its Virtualization:
https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/13257/?

Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

Dark0ne wrote:

I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

They're getting confused (which is kind of telling), there is virtualisation, it's just not the same as MO's virtualisation, which is what they are actually taking issue with.

We already did a Q&A with Tannin where it was explained why Tannin had decided to choose a different method, so the fact this needs to be brought up in a different news article about a different topic is...odd...to say the least.

If not using MO's virtualisation is a "no deal" for you, I just don't really understand why you're here, posting it as a comment in a completely unrelated article about Vortex.

Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions?

Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.*

AnyOldName3 wrote: Mod Organizer 2 doesn't seem to actually be abandoned anymore. There were commits today, for example, which doesn't suggest to me that it's abandoned.

Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.

*Replying from the forum is annoying*

ousnius wrote: A clean data folder is really not an argument for using or not using Vortex. It really isn't.

You're saying you're switching profiles all the time, but these are all things that are still possible (just as easily and quickly) as with NMM or MO. Just instead of doing it at runtime, the hard links are handling it within seconds. This was all explained in the previous news post already.

opusGlass wrote: I'm sorry Dark0ne, but it seems like you guys are trying to dodge the issue here.

Whether or not the underlying mechanism is the same as MO, there is one feature where NMM has never reached the bar. That is the ability to reorder the mod install order. In Mod Organizer, if ModA and ModB both have a copy of the same file and ModB is winning, you can move ModB above ModA and now ModA is winning. In NMM on the other hand, you have to uninstall and reinstall ModA. Additionally, in MO you can uninstall and reinstall ModA without altering the fact that ModB wins the conflict, another necessary function for debugging a mod list.

If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.

If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.

(And this is really a secondary issue, but I just want to point out that a clean Data folder is an important feature for many mod authors, who need to be able to package their mod files from Data without having to sort through thousands of files to figure out which ones belong to that mod. This isn't a problem for me because I've developed a workflow that doesn't rely on the true Data folder, but a few months ago that would've been a deal breaker for me, and I'm sure it still is for some authors.)

Dark0ne wrote:

If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.

If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.

The majority of complaints are because users want "a clean data folder" and aren't related to what you're talking about at all.

If you haven't heard anything about a particular aspect of Vortex it's because we're not ready to talk about it yet. Indeed, we'd rather wait until users actually used Vortex and saw how Tannin has implemented things, rather than trying to explain it to users and have them misunderstand or arbitrarily dismiss the methods Tannin has come up with as inferior based on no actual understanding of the issue.

VaultBoyAM wrote: @opusGlass You should read the original post AND all the replies by Tannin. He's already mentioned that you can set mod conflict victory, not exactly a mod install order, but you'll get the same end result.

fireundubh wrote:

Silence speaks for itself.

Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name.

velvetsanity wrote: El presidents hasn’t given up on MO2. He’s still working on it. I know this because a friend of mine is testing things in it for him.

lued123 wrote: Actually, Tannin has said that you can control "installation order" in Vortex. It's just a little different in that you don't control the entire priority order. You just set the order for the mods that need to be in a specific order. You say "Put mod B under mod A" rather than "Put all of my 300 mods in this exact order."

literallybyronic wrote: Honestly, without BOTH of those features (clean data folder/drag and drop install ordering) i will never use Vortex, period. I wouldn't even bother to try it out unless I knew those features were there, no matter how pretty it looks or how many other bells and whistles are added. I would bet that many, many experienced modders will feel exactly the same way.

Ethreon wrote: Still going on and on about how "many" want something you want. No, some want that. Many just wanna use mods, they don't really give a crap about virtualization or clean data.

Oblivionplayer437 wrote: Vortex will have to provide some serious advantages over MO2 in order to sway MO user to switch, none the least because development is ongoing with MO, albeit at a slow pace. But even the somewhat buggy present version of MO 2.0.8.3 is plenty good to manage modlists. We shall see soon enough what Vortex will be, and until then we should probably just shut up and wait. Devs are set on their course and will not change anything just because some unhappy peeps in here "demand" things. Some commentors have such a wrong attitude.

SirTwist wrote: Actually, there will be virtualization. They aren't going to cut it out. It will be similar to what NMM currently uses, and leave the way open for further virtualization, such as what MO2 uses. Or even a different system. And there won't be a no virtualization option. That, to me, is pretty clear. So, yes, Vortex will leave the data folders alone.

CrowbarRX wrote: I read "I want this, I want that" ...who says it doesn't already? My advice: just wait, you'll probably be surprised.

calscks wrote: more like "I want this, I want that...or else f*k off". it sounds more like a demand without appreciation and take things as granted. a few of them even went as far as ignoring what Dark0ne has been saying then proceed to tell the same tale again.

If "many" people didn't want the two main features that differentiate MO from NMM, then MO wouldn't even still be a thing, Tannin would not have been hired, and this discussion wouldn't be happening. There's no need to get your knickers twisted just because users are giving preliminary feedback that isn't 100% positive. I'm just dubious that they can achieve the same speed and functionality without using a VFS. From the likelihood of it adding an extra few seconds every time you change mod order to the fact that the time it takes to switch profiles in NMM vs MO is exponentially longer, I just don't see it as a feasible option. But I'm not going to write off the fact that the dev team might actually come through and surprise me, I'm not saying Vortex will be horrible or throwing hate, just saying at the end of the day, those features are almost always why people switch to MO in the first place, so why would anyone want to switch back without them?

[DragoonPreston]

In response to post #54930308. #54930478, #54930773, #54930833, #54930843, #54930848, #54930913, #54931018, #54931133, #54931298, #54931363, #54931473, #54931588, #54932243, #54933863, #54934008, #54934293, #54934383, #54935133, #54936008, #54939378, #54939888, #54941398, #54945963, #54946478, #54947498, #55048508 are all replies on the same post.

Kevin843 wrote: Like I said before no REAL virtual data=no using Vortex, I dont want my data folder messed up and ability to reorder mods is what makes MO2 the best mod manager. I am disappointed it is highly anticipated it will not have a virtual data like MO2. Hopefully there will still be community builds of MO2 for future Bethesda games. No way I can go back to installing mods to data folder now. I wont even bother using it if it dosent have these "Essential" MO2 features.

Zora wrote: I agree, not using a virtual file system is a step-back from what could be a huge improvement to mod managers we've seen so far. I still have high hopes for Vortex and will probably use it either way.

SarahTheMascara wrote: I agree. Keeping the data folder clean is essential for me as well. I have so many different builds for Skyrim and I'm jumping back and forth between profiles regularly.

BlueGunk wrote: From the interview with Tannin, 10 May 2017:

Robin: I think we both know the biggest questions we've received around Vortex have been in regards to virtualisation and how Vortex will handle and store files on people's hard-drives. Is Vortex going to use virtualisation?

Tannin: Yes it does.

I know people have - often very strong - opinions on the topic so I ask that you please read my reasons before you go to the comments and vent.

In the initial release of Vortex, virtualisation will be implemented using links (symbolic or hard links), similar to NMM v0.6. We've left the door open so we can implement different approaches (i.e. the usvfs library from Mod Organizer) but at this point I don't think there will be a "no virtualisation" option.

Dark0ne wrote: Thanks for your feedback.

If you're not interested in a mod manager that doesn't use MO's functionality VFS, that's fine. But this is about Vortex, not MO.

I'll be deleting any more comments that follow this line of thought as it's completely irrelevant to what I've talked about in this news article.

Yggdrasil7557 wrote: There are many reasons for this, Tannin is the original developer of mod organizer, and he was one of the people who decided not to use virtual filing. the new program will feature mod managing methods similar to how mod organizer currently works, the file managing will be able to work in many the same ways that mo does, the only difference is that it will actually place the files in the correct locations, this is for the same reason that el presidente gave up on mo2, the crashes due to virtual filing, especially in 64 bit are far too complex. for more info go read all previous posts about vortex, including the post where tannin said he was discontinuing development of mo1

Valyn81 wrote:

Remember that it is not the same thing as the old NMM did, corrupting your data folder easily.

TanninOne is helping them make the new Vortex, so you know Vortex will have some aspect of MO2 in order to help minimize data folder corruption.

*EDIT*
Seems BlueGunk, Yggdrasil7557, and I all have the same thought at about the same time, lol.

:wub:

 

Here is the link to help the people with Facts about Vortex and its Virtualization:
https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/13257/?

Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

Dark0ne wrote:

I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

They're getting confused (which is kind of telling), there is virtualisation, it's just not the same as MO's virtualisation, which is what they are actually taking issue with.

We already did a Q&A with Tannin where it was explained why Tannin had decided to choose a different method, so the fact this needs to be brought up in a different news article about a different topic is...odd...to say the least.

If not using MO's virtualisation is a "no deal" for you, I just don't really understand why you're here, posting it as a comment in a completely unrelated article about Vortex.

Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions?

Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.*

AnyOldName3 wrote: Mod Organizer 2 doesn't seem to actually be abandoned anymore. There were commits today, for example, which doesn't suggest to me that it's abandoned.

Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.

*Replying from the forum is annoying*

ousnius wrote: A clean data folder is really not an argument for using or not using Vortex. It really isn't.

You're saying you're switching profiles all the time, but these are all things that are still possible (just as easily and quickly) as with NMM or MO. Just instead of doing it at runtime, the hard links are handling it within seconds. This was all explained in the previous news post already.

opusGlass wrote: I'm sorry Dark0ne, but it seems like you guys are trying to dodge the issue here.

Whether or not the underlying mechanism is the same as MO, there is one feature where NMM has never reached the bar. That is the ability to reorder the mod install order. In Mod Organizer, if ModA and ModB both have a copy of the same file and ModB is winning, you can move ModB above ModA and now ModA is winning. In NMM on the other hand, you have to uninstall and reinstall ModA. Additionally, in MO you can uninstall and reinstall ModA without altering the fact that ModB wins the conflict, another necessary function for debugging a mod list.

If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.

If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.

(And this is really a secondary issue, but I just want to point out that a clean Data folder is an important feature for many mod authors, who need to be able to package their mod files from Data without having to sort through thousands of files to figure out which ones belong to that mod. This isn't a problem for me because I've developed a workflow that doesn't rely on the true Data folder, but a few months ago that would've been a deal breaker for me, and I'm sure it still is for some authors.)

Dark0ne wrote:

If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.

If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.

The majority of complaints are because users want "a clean data folder" and aren't related to what you're talking about at all.

If you haven't heard anything about a particular aspect of Vortex it's because we're not ready to talk about it yet. Indeed, we'd rather wait until users actually used Vortex and saw how Tannin has implemented things, rather than trying to explain it to users and have them misunderstand or arbitrarily dismiss the methods Tannin has come up with as inferior based on no actual understanding of the issue.

VaultBoyAM wrote: @opusGlass You should read the original post AND all the replies by Tannin. He's already mentioned that you can set mod conflict victory, not exactly a mod install order, but you'll get the same end result.

fireundubh wrote:

Silence speaks for itself.

Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name.

velvetsanity wrote: El presidents hasn’t given up on MO2. He’s still working on it. I know this because a friend of mine is testing things in it for him.

lued123 wrote: Actually, Tannin has said that you can control "installation order" in Vortex. It's just a little different in that you don't control the entire priority order. You just set the order for the mods that need to be in a specific order. You say "Put mod B under mod A" rather than "Put all of my 300 mods in this exact order."

literallybyronic wrote: Honestly, without BOTH of those features (clean data folder/drag and drop install ordering) i will never use Vortex, period. I wouldn't even bother to try it out unless I knew those features were there, no matter how pretty it looks or how many other bells and whistles are added. I would bet that many, many experienced modders will feel exactly the same way.

Ethreon wrote: Still going on and on about how "many" want something you want. No, some want that. Many just wanna use mods, they don't really give a crap about virtualization or clean data.

Oblivionplayer437 wrote: Vortex will have to provide some serious advantages over MO2 in order to sway MO user to switch, none the least because development is ongoing with MO, albeit at a slow pace. But even the somewhat buggy present version of MO 2.0.8.3 is plenty good to manage modlists. We shall see soon enough what Vortex will be, and until then we should probably just shut up and wait. Devs are set on their course and will not change anything just because some unhappy peeps in here "demand" things. Some commentors have such a wrong attitude.

SirTwist wrote: Actually, there will be virtualization. They aren't going to cut it out. It will be similar to what NMM currently uses, and leave the way open for further virtualization, such as what MO2 uses. Or even a different system. And there won't be a no virtualization option. That, to me, is pretty clear. So, yes, Vortex will leave the data folders alone.

CrowbarRX wrote: I read "I want this, I want that" ...who says it doesn't already? My advice: just wait, you'll probably be surprised.

calscks wrote: more like "I want this, I want that...or else f*k off". it sounds more like a demand without appreciation and take things as granted. a few of them even went as far as ignoring what Dark0ne has been saying then proceed to tell the same tale again.

literallybyronic wrote: If "many" people didn't want the two main features that differentiate MO from NMM, then MO wouldn't even still be a thing, Tannin would not have been hired, and this discussion wouldn't be happening. There's no need to get your knickers twisted just because users are giving preliminary feedback that isn't 100% positive. I'm just dubious that they can achieve the same speed and functionality without using a VFS. From the likelihood of it adding an extra few seconds every time you change mod order to the fact that the time it takes to switch profiles in NMM vs MO is exponentially longer, I just don't see it as a feasible option. But I'm not going to write off the fact that the dev team might actually come through and surprise me, I'm not saying Vortex will be horrible or throwing hate, just saying at the end of the day, those features are almost always why people switch to MO in the first place, so why would anyone want to switch back without them?

As an IT expert, going by how the engine is described to work in the last post. Switching between profiles will take at most seconds for very slow computers. And here's why I believe this.

First some background Info you're going to need to know;

Symbolic Links and Hard Links, for those who don't know what they are I'll describe them as short as I can. Symbolic Links are pointers to a file, like someone giving you directions to a place. Hard Links are files existing in more than one place in your file manager (AKA Windows Explorer), while still being only one file saved on your storage medium (AKA Hard Drive). This means you can have your files in more than one place, and it won't take up any more room on your storage medium.

Any program looking at one of these links will see the original file, thus drastically improving compatibility with other programs.

From what was said the new system will use those types of links to determine what files will "Be in the data folder". And because how easy it is to make links, profiles will likely just be a file of link locations that will be loaded when you load a profile. Clearing out the old links (saved in the profile you switch from) and put the new links in the folder. Thereby allowing you to have near limitless amounts of profiles while using very little room.

All the hard work of determining the links and what files should be used will likely be done while installing mods.

This method is also much safer than the use of a fully virtual file system, as it's a part of how modern Operating Systems work in the first place. I won't go deep into detail but if you want to know more search how files are actually saved onto a storage medium (Hard Drive).

I will also say if my educated guesses are correct you will have all the powerful functions of MO with a fully stable and safe implementation. Including the mod install order stuff, as it's just deciding what links to use. And allow nearly any program to be added with minimal effort, Not just games.

Finally I must say I have no part in the development of this product. I'm just an interested party trying to help others understand how the system may work.

[DragoonPreston]

In response to post #54979568. #54980923 is also a reply to the same post.

tomsite wrote: Geez guys, Vortex isn't even released in it's Alpha-State and the amount of users knowing best is hitting the roof.

We know pretty much nothing about Vortex, we don't know if it will be a virtual folder like in MO or if it will dump all mods in Data/.
We don't know anything about it's compatibility with NMM and if the data can be migrated. Heck, we don't even know if this was ever a discussion in the development team of Vortex. So hold your horses until a release of Vortex and then you can start whining, complaining or even much better, offer some constructive critic with which the developers can actually work.

I personally like following features of MO and hope they will be available in Vortex:
1. Virtual Folder. if i close MO i have a squeaky clean Data folder and could start a game completely without Mods if i want. it is the fastest "Out-of-the-box".
2. Each mod is isolated from all other mods.
3. That archives and plugins are seperated from each other. I can put a plugin at index 01 and the archive at index 254 if i please. This solves many issues with conflicting files.

If these features are present in Vortex, i will be happy already. If not it would be sad, however i am quite capable to also mod the living hell out of the game without any mod-manager. it is just not as comfortable.

axonis wrote: Just because you may get to see a filename in your Data folder doesn't mean that your mod manger is dumping that file there. It may be a symbolic link which can be easily purged, leaving the original file intact. The original file may be well organized in its own separate folder, outside of Data.

The problem with a so-called "clean" Data folder is that your mod's author cannot support you if he needs to see and analyze what the game sees.

From what I've managed to gather, MO's "Virtual Folder" Is an entirely separate 32 bit file system. That caused it to be incompatible with most other programs, and introduced a lot of limitations to what it could do. Don't get me wrong what it was capable of doing it did great, but at the cost of all the features a 64 bit file system brings.

Because Skyrim was a 32 bit game this wasn't a problem, but Skyrim SE is a 64 bit game and therefore is incompatible at its most base level with the file system MO uses.

Vortex, from what I've read and what I know as an IT guy. Is using a VERY powerful system built into modern file systems. "Links". Links let you point a piece of software to a file as if the file were in the folder it's looking at. The files don't even have to be on the same drive if you do it right. The reason it will look like files are in your data folder is because "File Explorer" is a piece of software.

[ExEBoss]

In response to post #55008708. #55008758, #55013093, #55040788, #55041363, #55042663 are all replies on the same post.

is33d34dp30ple wrote: Thank you guys for the update! I cant wait to see Vortex when it becomes officially available!

is33d34dp30ple wrote: Maybe we could try a closed alpha shortly before release for premium members? ;) ;)

Ethreon wrote: There's already an alpha release and test cycle in place. It's even said in the article. Then the release will be public, not for the premium only.

Risakisa wrote: That's actually not a bad idea IMO. Give premium members a month or three to find some more bugs and give feedback, and then once they can be sure that the potentially tens of thousands of regular users won't fill the forums with known issues and nonsense, they can let them test it out. :)

Ethreon wrote: For what purpose? If it's closed testing it's reserved for hand picked individuals who know what they have to do. If it's open to public it should be opened to everyone, not just a few.

demonofsarila wrote: Many sites will allow earlier access to up and coming features for paid members before allowing access for free members, as an incentive to get people to pay. It also is a way to get general user feedback while cutting down on duplicate reports simply because there's only a fraction of the user base trying it out (thus reducing the time it takes for the site owners to go through all the bug reports, complaining because it's different, and whatnot).

Not saying I agree with the practice, but there's sites that do that sort of thing all the time.

I believe that it’s far more likely that it will be mod authors who will get early access to this software first and then it will be rolled out to everyone else, similarly to how the website redesign launch was handled, see previous article:

We're doing a very soft launch of this redesign. In September we provided the mod authors with access to the new site to receive their feedback and bug hunting help and a few weeks ago we provided the link to the new redesign in our forums and on the SkyrimMods subreddit. I want to thank all the users who have helped us in identifying and fixing issues during this process. It's been an extremely useful time for us as we've managed to push 88 fixes to the site as a result of the bug reports you've given us (according to our GitHub page).

As a matter of fact, I made use of this early access to fix links in my mod pages so that they would work correctly on the redesigned and original site. Edited November 7, 2017 by ExEBoss

[DragoonPreston]

In response to post #54947243. #54947383, #54947628, #54951293, #54951563, #54951708 are all replies on the same post.

oooii3gg wrote: I was pretty happy with Mod Organizer, I have no idea why you decided to throw everything out and start from scratch.

lunsmann wrote: Vortex is replacing Nexus Mod Manager. Not MO.

SharraShimada wrote: Vortex ist Nexus-Mod-Manager reloaded. Mod-Organizer is a completly different thing.
And while Tannin was busy with MO2 development, what somewhat went not so well, Nexus made him the offer to make a new mod manager for them. MO is still in development by other people.

I´m sure, Tannin will take some of MO´s features to vortex, and to be honest, NMM needet someone with experience and skill very much.

markdf wrote: Will vortex use a virtual file system like MO?

Vanguarde2017 wrote: No

lued123 wrote: It will have virtualization, but not like MO's.

They decided to make a new manager because the way MO did things won't work for all games. The new system there going to be using will. And they threw out the NMM engine because they could do better by starting over.

[DFX2K9]

In response to post #54930308. #54930478, #54930773, #54930833, #54930843, #54930848, #54930913, #54931018, #54931133, #54931298, #54931363, #54931473, #54931588, #54932243, #54933863, #54934008, #54934293, #54934383, #54935133, #54936008, #54939378, #54939888, #54941398, #54945963, #54946478, #54947498, #55048508, #55052853 are all replies on the same post.

Kevin843 wrote: Like I said before no REAL virtual data=no using Vortex, I dont want my data folder messed up and ability to reorder mods is what makes MO2 the best mod manager. I am disappointed it is highly anticipated it will not have a virtual data like MO2. Hopefully there will still be community builds of MO2 for future Bethesda games. No way I can go back to installing mods to data folder now. I wont even bother using it if it dosent have these "Essential" MO2 features.

Zora wrote: I agree, not using a virtual file system is a step-back from what could be a huge improvement to mod managers we've seen so far. I still have high hopes for Vortex and will probably use it either way.

SarahTheMascara wrote: I agree. Keeping the data folder clean is essential for me as well. I have so many different builds for Skyrim and I'm jumping back and forth between profiles regularly.

BlueGunk wrote: From the interview with Tannin, 10 May 2017:

Robin: I think we both know the biggest questions we've received around Vortex have been in regards to virtualisation and how Vortex will handle and store files on people's hard-drives. Is Vortex going to use virtualisation?

Tannin: Yes it does.

I know people have - often very strong - opinions on the topic so I ask that you please read my reasons before you go to the comments and vent.

In the initial release of Vortex, virtualisation will be implemented using links (symbolic or hard links), similar to NMM v0.6. We've left the door open so we can implement different approaches (i.e. the usvfs library from Mod Organizer) but at this point I don't think there will be a "no virtualisation" option.

Dark0ne wrote: Thanks for your feedback.

If you're not interested in a mod manager that doesn't use MO's functionality VFS, that's fine. But this is about Vortex, not MO.

I'll be deleting any more comments that follow this line of thought as it's completely irrelevant to what I've talked about in this news article.

Yggdrasil7557 wrote: There are many reasons for this, Tannin is the original developer of mod organizer, and he was one of the people who decided not to use virtual filing. the new program will feature mod managing methods similar to how mod organizer currently works, the file managing will be able to work in many the same ways that mo does, the only difference is that it will actually place the files in the correct locations, this is for the same reason that el presidente gave up on mo2, the crashes due to virtual filing, especially in 64 bit are far too complex. for more info go read all previous posts about vortex, including the post where tannin said he was discontinuing development of mo1

Valyn81 wrote:

Remember that it is not the same thing as the old NMM did, corrupting your data folder easily.

TanninOne is helping them make the new Vortex, so you know Vortex will have some aspect of MO2 in order to help minimize data folder corruption.

*EDIT*
Seems BlueGunk, Yggdrasil7557, and I all have the same thought at about the same time, lol.

:wub:

 

Here is the link to help the people with Facts about Vortex and its Virtualization:
https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/13257/?

Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

Dark0ne wrote:

I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

They're getting confused (which is kind of telling), there is virtualisation, it's just not the same as MO's virtualisation, which is what they are actually taking issue with.

We already did a Q&A with Tannin where it was explained why Tannin had decided to choose a different method, so the fact this needs to be brought up in a different news article about a different topic is...odd...to say the least.

If not using MO's virtualisation is a "no deal" for you, I just don't really understand why you're here, posting it as a comment in a completely unrelated article about Vortex.

Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions?

Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.*

AnyOldName3 wrote: Mod Organizer 2 doesn't seem to actually be abandoned anymore. There were commits today, for example, which doesn't suggest to me that it's abandoned.

Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.

*Replying from the forum is annoying*

ousnius wrote: A clean data folder is really not an argument for using or not using Vortex. It really isn't.

You're saying you're switching profiles all the time, but these are all things that are still possible (just as easily and quickly) as with NMM or MO. Just instead of doing it at runtime, the hard links are handling it within seconds. This was all explained in the previous news post already.

opusGlass wrote: I'm sorry Dark0ne, but it seems like you guys are trying to dodge the issue here.

Whether or not the underlying mechanism is the same as MO, there is one feature where NMM has never reached the bar. That is the ability to reorder the mod install order. In Mod Organizer, if ModA and ModB both have a copy of the same file and ModB is winning, you can move ModB above ModA and now ModA is winning. In NMM on the other hand, you have to uninstall and reinstall ModA. Additionally, in MO you can uninstall and reinstall ModA without altering the fact that ModB wins the conflict, another necessary function for debugging a mod list.

If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.

If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.

(And this is really a secondary issue, but I just want to point out that a clean Data folder is an important feature for many mod authors, who need to be able to package their mod files from Data without having to sort through thousands of files to figure out which ones belong to that mod. This isn't a problem for me because I've developed a workflow that doesn't rely on the true Data folder, but a few months ago that would've been a deal breaker for me, and I'm sure it still is for some authors.)

Dark0ne wrote:

If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.

If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.

The majority of complaints are because users want "a clean data folder" and aren't related to what you're talking about at all.

If you haven't heard anything about a particular aspect of Vortex it's because we're not ready to talk about it yet. Indeed, we'd rather wait until users actually used Vortex and saw how Tannin has implemented things, rather than trying to explain it to users and have them misunderstand or arbitrarily dismiss the methods Tannin has come up with as inferior based on no actual understanding of the issue.

VaultBoyAM wrote: @opusGlass You should read the original post AND all the replies by Tannin. He's already mentioned that you can set mod conflict victory, not exactly a mod install order, but you'll get the same end result.

fireundubh wrote:

Silence speaks for itself.

Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name.

velvetsanity wrote: El presidents hasn’t given up on MO2. He’s still working on it. I know this because a friend of mine is testing things in it for him.

lued123 wrote: Actually, Tannin has said that you can control "installation order" in Vortex. It's just a little different in that you don't control the entire priority order. You just set the order for the mods that need to be in a specific order. You say "Put mod B under mod A" rather than "Put all of my 300 mods in this exact order."

literallybyronic wrote: Honestly, without BOTH of those features (clean data folder/drag and drop install ordering) i will never use Vortex, period. I wouldn't even bother to try it out unless I knew those features were there, no matter how pretty it looks or how many other bells and whistles are added. I would bet that many, many experienced modders will feel exactly the same way.

Ethreon wrote: Still going on and on about how "many" want something you want. No, some want that. Many just wanna use mods, they don't really give a crap about virtualization or clean data.

Oblivionplayer437 wrote: Vortex will have to provide some serious advantages over MO2 in order to sway MO user to switch, none the least because development is ongoing with MO, albeit at a slow pace. But even the somewhat buggy present version of MO 2.0.8.3 is plenty good to manage modlists. We shall see soon enough what Vortex will be, and until then we should probably just shut up and wait. Devs are set on their course and will not change anything just because some unhappy peeps in here "demand" things. Some commentors have such a wrong attitude.

SirTwist wrote: Actually, there will be virtualization. They aren't going to cut it out. It will be similar to what NMM currently uses, and leave the way open for further virtualization, such as what MO2 uses. Or even a different system. And there won't be a no virtualization option. That, to me, is pretty clear. So, yes, Vortex will leave the data folders alone.

CrowbarRX wrote: I read "I want this, I want that" ...who says it doesn't already? My advice: just wait, you'll probably be surprised.

calscks wrote: more like "I want this, I want that...or else f*k off". it sounds more like a demand without appreciation and take things as granted. a few of them even went as far as ignoring what Dark0ne has been saying then proceed to tell the same tale again.

literallybyronic wrote: If "many" people didn't want the two main features that differentiate MO from NMM, then MO wouldn't even still be a thing, Tannin would not have been hired, and this discussion wouldn't be happening. There's no need to get your knickers twisted just because users are giving preliminary feedback that isn't 100% positive. I'm just dubious that they can achieve the same speed and functionality without using a VFS. From the likelihood of it adding an extra few seconds every time you change mod order to the fact that the time it takes to switch profiles in NMM vs MO is exponentially longer, I just don't see it as a feasible option. But I'm not going to write off the fact that the dev team might actually come through and surprise me, I'm not saying Vortex will be horrible or throwing hate, just saying at the end of the day, those features are almost always why people switch to MO in the first place, so why would anyone want to switch back without them?

DragoonPreston wrote: As an IT expert, going by how the engine is described to work in the last post. Switching between profiles will take at most seconds for very slow computers. And here's why I believe this.

First some background Info you're going to need to know;

Symbolic Links and Hard Links, for those who don't know what they are I'll describe them as short as I can. Symbolic Links are pointers to a file, like someone giving you directions to a place. Hard Links are files existing in more than one place in your file manager (AKA Windows Explorer), while still being only one file saved on your storage medium (AKA Hard Drive). This means you can have your files in more than one place, and it won't take up any more room on your storage medium.

Any program looking at one of these links will see the original file, thus drastically improving compatibility with other programs.

From what was said the new system will use those types of links to determine what files will "Be in the data folder". And because how easy it is to make links, profiles will likely just be a file of link locations that will be loaded when you load a profile. Clearing out the old links (saved in the profile you switch from) and put the new links in the folder. Thereby allowing you to have near limitless amounts of profiles while using very little room.

All the hard work of determining the links and what files should be used will likely be done while installing mods.

This method is also much safer than the use of a fully virtual file system, as it's a part of how modern Operating Systems work in the first place. I won't go deep into detail but if you want to know more search how files are actually saved onto a storage medium (Hard Drive).

I will also say if my educated guesses are correct you will have all the powerful functions of MO with a fully stable and safe implementation. Including the mod install order stuff, as it's just deciding what links to use. And allow nearly any program to be added with minimal effort, Not just games.

Finally I must say I have no part in the development of this product. I'm just an interested party trying to help others understand how the system may work.

I'll add to this that Vortex must be functional for all of the games Nexus manages, including some games that are older or use different libraries to access files. If all you play are Bethesda games, that's not a problem, use MO. But not every game (or every system for that matter *cue the glaring at his own PC*) plays well with the way MO's runtime virtualization works. Dark0ne and Tannrin picked the most compatible approach for the largest number of games on the platform.

And as Tannrin said when he discussed it: Vortex can easily have a plugin made later to enable that as an option once the program itself gets a thorough testing.

[DFX2K9]

In response to post #55041943.

demonofsarila wrote: Now long now? Wireframes are supposed to be before serious development. In my experience being a UX designer who comes in after major dev time has already been sunk into the project just makes everything a pain. But if Tannin is a better dev than the ones I've worked with in the past, then maybe it will be fine.

Also the explanation of the virtualization thing make no sense to me. I understand what hard links are in windows, but if NMM is actually using them I don't see any proof of that. It seems to keep 3 copies of mods: zip'ed archive it downloaded, extracted original, and data folder copy for the game to use (and me to modify if I choose). If this is incorrect, please explain how it actually works because I prefer to know that.

While it would be cool for a mod manager to keep changes to esp files if they were "over written" then that "over write" was removed, it's more important to keep a backup of the original download file locally. You never know when a mod author will just remove their file/s, so a local backup is the only way to ensure you can always go back to the original. I often edit mods I've downloaded, and sometimes I royally mess everything up. Though a more stable way to keep edits users make to mods would be a very welcome thing. Some mods I've made the same edits to many many times because I lose those changes when I go through major mod re-configurations. Heck, if Vortex keep a copy of the original file/s, it could compare them to what's installed and tell me rather I've edited the mod (for me that would be super useful). Though from what I've read, one of the promised features for Vortex was real mod profile management that actually works. That would be cool too, most cuz overhaul mods.

If I recall correctly:

Inside the folder where you have the unzipped mods, "D:\Games\Nexus Mod Manager\Skyrim\Mods\" for me, there's a folder called 'virtual install' with folders relating to the mod ID's of the mods. when you change a file inside your data folder, the files you're changing are actually in here.

A lot of NMM's issues came with the upkeep of this folder and the links pointing to it. That's why changing profiles is downright torture on NMM.

[HizFather]

I'm a simple man, I just want something that actually shows me what mods I need to update when I search for mod updates.

[ilDuderoni]

In response to post #55023428. #55028243, #55028883, #55030358 are all replies on the same post.

RJ the Shadow wrote: I'm annoyed and impatient. But I've been waiting for what, a year now? Longer? Do I even know at this point?

Just make sure it works well and it's fabulous, because I've been holding off on regular modding for a very long time now in anticipation (would've appreciated a warning that it'd take this long beforehand tbh, but hindsight is what it is I suppose) and while the opportunity has been invaluable in me exploring a vast amount of other games (even recently finished MGS: Twin Snakes), I'd like to be able to soon-ish test out whether modded Beth games are the kind of content that'll fit on my Twitch streams.

I'm a mod junky and I've been surviving on minor dosages for a long while now. But if it works well and it manages to do (and perhaps more than) what Mod Organizer did, the wait will all be worth it for me. I know this whole writing is a little self-centered but seriously dudes...

...I want my fix

Loveblanket wrote: Entitled much?

Timmhaze wrote: Don't know if you've ever done any amount of formal work on a project of this scale but it takes a serious amount of time, troubleshooting and fixing. This isn't some overnight job the Nexus team is working on, its merging bleedin' NMM and MO (as far as I can tell).
Be patient, lose the entitled attitude and release day will fly up, whenever it may be. Remember, all of this is being given to us for free.

Augusta Calidia wrote: "I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed! A heavy weight of hours has chained and bowed." (Excerpt from "Ode to the West Wind" by Percy Bysshe Shelley).

Entitled, annoyed, impatient. I mean, I think I had two in there already but if you really wanna discuss semantics, I'll just clock out here and consider it a failed attempt at humor, or just the wrong audience.

No, I don't have a clue how long projects like these take but an estimated distinction between "oh, a few months" to what, a year? Would've been welcome, even if it'd turn out to be incorrect. It's preferable to complete silence and uncertainty. It has had a consequence on the choices I've made and I've expressed that.

Cheers. Edited November 8, 2017 by RJ the Shadow

[Unilythe]

In response to post #55023428. #55028243, #55028883, #55030358, #55063573 are all replies on the same post.

RJ the Shadow wrote: I'm annoyed and impatient. But I've been waiting for what, a year now? Longer? Do I even know at this point?

Just make sure it works well and it's fabulous, because I've been holding off on regular modding for a very long time now in anticipation (would've appreciated a warning that it'd take this long beforehand tbh, but hindsight is what it is I suppose) and while the opportunity has been invaluable in me exploring a vast amount of other games (even recently finished MGS: Twin Snakes), I'd like to be able to soon-ish test out whether modded Beth games are the kind of content that'll fit on my Twitch streams.

I'm a mod junky and I've been surviving on minor dosages for a long while now. But if it works well and it manages to do (and perhaps more than) what Mod Organizer did, the wait will all be worth it for me. I know this whole writing is a little self-centered but seriously dudes...

...I want my fix

Loveblanket wrote: Entitled much?

Timmhaze wrote: Don't know if you've ever done any amount of formal work on a project of this scale but it takes a serious amount of time, troubleshooting and fixing. This isn't some overnight job the Nexus team is working on, its merging bleedin' NMM and MO (as far as I can tell).
Be patient, lose the entitled attitude and release day will fly up, whenever it may be. Remember, all of this is being given to us for free.

Augusta Calidia wrote: "I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed! A heavy weight of hours has chained and bowed." (Excerpt from "Ode to the West Wind" by Percy Bysshe Shelley).

RJ the Shadow wrote: Entitled, annoyed, impatient. I mean, I think I had two in there already but if you really wanna discuss semantics, I'll just clock out here and consider it a failed attempt at humor, or just the wrong audience.

No, I don't have a clue how long projects like these take but an estimated distinction between "oh, a few months" to what, a year? Would've been welcome, even if it'd turn out to be incorrect. It's preferable to complete silence and uncertainty. It has had a consequence on the choices I've made and I've expressed that.

Cheers.

As a software developer, people like you really annoy me. You don't understand what software developers do and how much time and work goes into it, so when you make assumptions based on your ignorance then really, that's all on you. If you make choices based on those false assumptions that it wouldn't take long, then that's your own problem.

Especially when it's free and you're not entitled to a damn thing. Edited November 8, 2017 by Unilythe