lemonsquare
-
Posts
13 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by lemonsquare
-
-
I'm having the same issue. Occurs on latest stable and beta release of Vortex.
-
In response to post #50676477. #50680702 is also a reply to the same post.GOG's library of games is entirely DRM free.CokeVoAYCE wrote: can someone explain what the difference is between GOG and steam? what are the pros and cons of each?axonis wrote: https://levelskip.com/consoles/I-prefer-GOG
-
In response to post #43228135. #43228440, #43228710, #43228800, #43229750, #43229950, #43230240, #43231080, #43231240, #43232990 are all replies on the same post.Good lord, did you even read the bloody article? Unbelievable...Mebantiza wrote: So will it be safe to say, this 'new' MM have will none of the features of NMM, and all the features of MO. IoW, just a reskinned and renamed MO? As bad as NMM 6x has been, there are things about NMM that make people want to use it, well, the pre- 6x versions anyhow. How is forcing MO and its structure on everyone, even those that don't really want it, a benefit?
I use NMM 56.1, and do NOT require virtual installs. Its a feature, for some, but not a REQUIRED one, and I dont want it forced on me. 56.1 is old, crashes constantly, and is not all that stable tbh. But its still far preferable to anything NMM 6x, and have no need to have MO forced upon me. Not going to argue which one is 'superior', that is pointless. NMM is straight-forward enough to do what it has to, and did it well enough, well at least untill they tried to steal some of MO thunder. Then it went to complete and utter $yht. Up until that point, it wasn't perfect, but it did the job. NMM 6x added a needless feature that no one asked for, and never worked properly. Had NMM retained its pre-VM structure and improved that, things would likely be fine with it even now.
So now, the 'solution' it seems, is make everyone use MO whether they like it or not...HadToRegister wrote: Having used both, I like MO, and I also like NMM, but only pre 0.62 NMM, as 0.62 and above just acted like malware and destroyed most of our mod lists
NOWHERE in this thread has it been said that the new NMM will have NONE of the features of NMM and/or ALL of the features of MO.
NOWHERE has the subject of "Forcing MO on everyone" even been discussed.
If you use NMM 56.1 (For whatever hipster anti-something reason), then keep using it, but stop complaining about something that you're not only NOT going to use, but are also so misinformed about, that you were unable to make even one factual statement about the plans for NMM/MO for the future.xyon71 wrote: Why go right to negativity??
I think it is very UNsafe to say it is just going to be a "re-branded MO"
It appears to me that they are wanting to produce a simple, yet powerful NEW tool for everyone to use with varying degrees of complexity based on need.
I didn't read anywhere that they are "forcing" anything, I read that they are taking all of the feedback from BOTH tools to incorporate the best features into 1 "best" tool.
I switched from NMM to MO 2 years ago, and found it simply wonderful to be able to try out different mods in different orders without breaking my base game.
I will admit there was a learning curve, but not too steep, and I am far from an advanced modder.
I for 1 am excited to see what these talented minds can come up with.
For whatever this or that, I say all of them are in it because they want to give people the best modding experience possible, so lets give them a chance before we jump on our band-wagons and shoot harpoons because we "think" we already know what they are going to do...archerarcher wrote: Same here. In times where disk space is cheaper than fuel I think this virtual install feature is completely obsolete. I don't like it and I don't like the problems it makes with certain mod installations.
I use NMM 56.1 for Skyrim too, it's very stable to me, no problems at all, really. Okay, I track all my (700~) mods and over the years my documentation has grown into a complex website but I know exactly what to overwrite and what not and I know where my files are and I don't care about some gigabytes disk space more or less for my favorite game that I am playing/ modding since Nov 2011.
So what should a future mod mager be like?
1. Manage mod files
That's the absolute priority. Everey feature that affects this should be removed or be avoided.
2. Simple to use, simple to manage
No need for virtual installs, no installation of mods directly by clicking on a button on a website. I need control! Everyone needs control. Is there anybody out there who installs mods via website button? I inspect EVERY file before I use a mod so you should too if you don't want to loose track of your installment.
That's what I want from a mod manager and that's why I use NMM 56.1 and not MOmoriador wrote: @archerarcher,
Control. Precisely.
The more lines of code that come between me and the stuff I want to use, the more difficult it becomes to fix what ought to be minor problems. Instead of simply locating the problem file or reference and fixing it, you have to contend with the installation software and all of its quirks. Instead of replacing a single bad mesh, for instance, you may end up having to uninstall an entire mod, create a new mod archive with the new mesh, and install it all over again.
The more control you take away from users, the more those users have to rely on mod authors (and mod manager programmers) to fix every single little problem.
But there seems to be a trend in software to create bigger and bigger walls of code between the user and the actual assets/files that user wants to use. I see it in 3D render software, image editing software, anything that relies heavily on user created content really.
Which is completely backwards, IMO. The more imperfect the assets, the more DIRECT control the user needs to have in order to fix those imperfections. And the more an industry relies on user generated content, the more imperfections there will be.
The idea of creating code that allows a user to click a single magic button is great indeed! But only if that code depends on assets that have been through a very rigorous quality assessment process which requires very strict standardization. If those assets are potentially riddled with bugs, as any user created content will be, then you can't wall the user off from direct control or their only option when things go wrong will be to scream at the developers.
I see a lot of screaming at mod authors and mod manager programmers going on in Nexus comments (and the forums of many other industries). But I guess that's the price you pay when you try to make things *too* easy for the user.
Not too long ago, when you wouldn't even think of assembling a bookcase without having some basic tools on hand, if the predrilled holes didn't line up, you drilled new ones in the right place, and screwed the bits together. Now that you've been led to believe that everything you will ever need comes in one single box, you swear loudly, pack your Ikea shelves back into the torn up bits of cardboard, take the whole thing back to the store for a refund, and post a nasty product review on a website while sitting angrily among your still unshelved piles of books. Given how much incredibly detailed information is available about how to fix innumerable kinds of problems, it seems that people are becoming more personally helpless than ever.Tannin42 wrote: It's no rebranded MO, it's a fresh start. "Controversial" MO features like the virtual filesystem may exist as options / extensions but they will not be defaults or requirements.
With MO I was happy to develop a tool that would only appeal to a small crowd. It was always intended to be complement the existing solutions like OBMM/NMM or wrye bash, not to replace them.
Now we're writing a modding tool for all Nexus users so obviously the approach will be different. I'm not ignorant of the problems with MO but with MO I had one target audience, now it's a different one.
We try to make the new mod manager attractive to advanced & MO users through extensibility, not by doing the same again and hoping the majority of users will suddenly like it better.moriador wrote: Well, it is very refreshing to see that the developer is reading the comments!
We all know that there's an enormous divide between those who want the software to do it all (and who -- rightly, I note -- demand that such software work as perfectly as possible) and those who insist on getting their hands dirty and hate to have anything stand in their way.
If you can bridge that gap, you'll have done something very worthy indeed.
I look forward to what you can come up with.Exoclyps wrote: I really really like the Virtual Folders that MO provides. It makes my life so much easier when it comes to modding. Especially when it comes to making my own mods.
I hope that such feature will be included in the new NMM if the goal is to stop giving MO future support. I don't mind if I have to activate it for my profile for it to work, as long as the option to do so is there.DFX2K9 wrote: @tamreil42
Honestly? You've got the skillset to fix most of what's bugging people with NMM. Improving the reliability of large file installs would get you my vote by itself. Having the option to use an MO-style visualized install if you wanted/needed/could use it would just be icing on the cake.
That being said, I'd recommend (both for mo's case and NMM if it gets such an option) some way of manually going through the resulting 'game directory' after you've installed your mods, so you can, if needed, find and replace the odd burp.
MO looks like an excellent peice of software, even though I couldn't use it because the CK didn't like it for some odd reason (I'll blame the CK here)archerarcher wrote: Tannin42 says:
" "Controversial" MO features like the virtual filesystem may exist as options / extensions but they will not be defaults or requirements."
I REALLY hope so. As far as I know Fallout 4 for example needs the new (newer than 0.56.1 ) NMM and users are bound to use virtual installments. Is that correct? This is one reason I haven't installed any mod and haven't played FO4... -
While I'm glad you've decided to rewrite NMM from the ground up and hopefully offer everyone a much better experience (and I'm very much looking forward to it), the months of silence on the issues plaguing the current NMM have been unacceptable. I think you need to provide more updates on plans - and follow up. Publicly acknowledge issues and let us know you're working on them even if a fix is a month away. This applies to the website revamp too. Don't leave us in the dark... Dark0ne.
-
Classic. I was actually really impressed with 62's huge changelog and most of all having fixed mod update warnings being broken after an absurd amount of time. Sad to hear it's still in such a bad state for some. I wish Robin had addressed NMM more in his AMA/was asked more. It's clear NMM's development is in dire need of coding help, and I would take a reliable NMM over a website redesign any day.
-
Still, like many others, having the update issue with NMM. That makes sense considering it's been how many months and days since it's been updated? What's going on? This is an important issue. Please update us on what's happening. I don't remember the last time NMM has gone so long without an update, let alone for such a huge problem - not just for mod consumers, but mod creators with undoubtedly people constantly having wrong versions of mods because NMM reports up to date. It's plain unacceptable to not even communicate via main page on this.
-
I've had this issue for quite a while, especially on the latest version of NMM, 61.23. The only way to reliably check for updates is to literally visit the mod page of each mod installed. It's been a long time since .23 out... we're all waiting for an update to fix this at the very least.
-
In response to post #39909305. #39910355, #39912505, #39913875, #39914805, #39915370, #39919085 are all replies on the same post."I think what he is saying is that do we really need these new features? Honestly I have zero use for them."ff7legend wrote: I seriously hope this upcoming update won't be a radical one like the disastrous 0.60 update was. A lot of modders, including the SOT (Sands of Time) Team, lost their entire modded Skyrim setup due to the aforementioned radical update. I really don't want to have to play Russian Roulette with future NMM updates.Dark0ne wrote: That's kind of the entire point of asking for people to help us bug test before major releases, guys.drscott11 wrote: I think what he is saying is that do we really need these new features? Honestly I have zero use for them. Are they nice tech achievements, yes, but not really necessary imo.
I'd really like to see more QoL features like a better UI, the ability to "send esp to top/bottom" of the mod list or to a specific number/place in the load order. How about fixing the horrid column resizing in the mod activation list or improving the abysmal performance of the "remove mod from all profiles" as it takes forever even on an i7 w/SSD. I could go on but I'm sure others will agree.
I'd like to see more focus on improving the core product as opposed to adding unneeded features.janishewski wrote: I couldn't disagree more. These features are, I think, fundamental to make modding easier which should be the main goal of NMM in the first place. Exchanging mod setups with people that have already worked out the kinks and have a stable game going is a fantastic feature that will bring more people into modding. I see, almost daily, stories around the internet about how people want to mod their games, but don't know where to start, and let's be honest, this is a good community, but as I know from when I started years ago, it is not the most friendly towards people new to it and new to modding. Just because a feature may not be important to you, does not mean it won't be important to modding. There is no reason for a mod manager of any kind to exist if the point isn't to make modding games easier. If you want to wait and see how the next release pans out before upgrading, I see no problem. The current version of NMM isn't working properly in many ways anyway.sgtmcbiscuits wrote: @drscott11
It sounds like you know a fair bit about modding your game. That's great! The problem is, the vast majority of people don't. This kind of stuff isn't there for the people that know a lot about modding, it's there for those who want it to be simple and easy. There are tons of people who want to get into modding their games, but for them, it's too intimidating to start. And who can blame them for feeling that way? With nearly 50K mods uploaded to the Skyrim Nexus, and 12K on Fallout 4, that's a lot to take in for someone new. Adding shareable profiles is mostly for those new people. It helps them get a grasp on how modding works, without throwing too much at them. That way, the modding community expands it's borders; and the more people in the community the better! After all, the more people that are here, the more people will be making great new mods, which means great news for you!
Just because this update won't accomplish things for you directly doesn't mean that it won't be beneficial to everyone in the long runarkayn71 wrote: What I want is the capability of upgrading mods back again.
Currently all we can do is install the new version and then uninstall the old version, not intuitive at all.midtek wrote: Well, so as long as update doesn't cause malfunction, there's no problem about adding new features right? Even if some find it has zero use for them. OP and drscott11 are talking about different things.
What an absolutely puzzling statement. The upcoming features are extremely, extremely useful, objectively speaking. -
In response to post #36907610. #36907990 is also a reply to the same post.I understand why they do it. There are insane amounts of people accessing Nexus and downloading from it constantly - couple that with astronomical maintenance, server, website expenses etc. it's a fair solution, speaking as someone who has never been a premium member. The speeds a standard user gets are not bad at all.SternbergMD wrote: What do you think about removing restrictions on download speed for average users? I think that this shouldn't be limited to paid users, honestly.crisdavid7341 wrote: The demands they get is too high to remove this restriction while this is a feature open to premium members. Premium exist so that those you actually use/visit nexus frequently can benefit without restrictions and support nexus. The servers they have to get and maintain cost a lot; with how many people come to this site even outside just downloading mods. This is a community not necessarily just a file hosting site.
-
This is good news and I'm happy you guys are doing this. I have some feedback for you, Paul, or anyone on the team. The forum thread containing NMM's changelog and expected next release has been incorrect for a long time and/or misleading. The actual changelog not being updated is an issue but much less of one than the "next build' section at the bottom, which for a long time, has incorrectly stated the expected release of 62.0, as well as the release of mod profile sharing - it currently says "Late November!"
I'd just like to ask that the thread be maintained with new releases, but also, either offer realistic or generous time frames for new version releases, or remove that section altogether.
Cheers
-
Will NMM 61 be released for F4? Considering the intended release date still says "late October"...
-
In response to post #30152945. #30155500, #30159390, #30165290, #30179575 are all replies on the same post.It varies based on timezone. It says November 9th for me too but expect it at 11:59 PM on Monday night... or basically the 10th. Nobody gets it early.ravernware wrote: 25% into my FO4 preload. Steam will unlock the game Nov 9 for those who pre-ordered. Awesome. A full day earlier than official release! I am sooo amped. Way to go NEXUS on getting ready!! You are as always great! Oh, and I like the color scheme.
I hope Bethesda releases the CK earlier than they are saying.JianXintou wrote: Are you sure? Because I'm pretty certain my steam says the game unlocks sometime early on Tuesday. I mean it says Nov. 9th but tha's technically not true if you do the math, 2 days and 17 hours - that makes for roughly 2 AM on Nov 10th.nehkz wrote: I don't think that's true.
I mean, I hope it is, but I really don't think it'll unlock earlier for people like us that pre-ordered.hgrunt wrote: for me its 3am November 10ravernware wrote: copied from steam's FO4 store page:
Bethesda Game Studios, the award-winning creators of Fallout 3 and The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, welcome you to the world of Fallout 4 – their most ambitious game ever, and the next generation of open-world gaming.
Release Date: Nov 9, 2015
Now what time on Nov 9th? Dunno. I'm on the west coast so I shall see come Monday.
Vortex 1.3.22 Downloading/Installing Mods Issue
in Vortex Support
Posted
My Issue and associated error message are the same as the thread author's, hence the "Me Too" reply, as you put it. Do you have any help to offer... or? Seems like a network issue on Nexus' end, but I'd be happy to provide any info that would be helpful in this case.