Jump to content

Big changes for the Nexus Mod Manager and the introduction of Tannin42, our new head of NMM development

Dark0ne

By Dark0ne
in Site Updates

 Share

Recommended Posts

elezraita Enthusiast

elezraita

Posted
Posted
In response to post #43223160. #43223235, #43225810, #43226065, #43226570, #43226580, #43226675, #43226930, #43227145, #43227835, #43229000, #43229600, #43229700, #43231180, #43250055, #43250125, #43252635, #43253770, #43254560 are all replies on the same post.


ContessaR wrote: Simple question: Will you be keeping MO's virtual installation/file system? That's all I want. Don't care what the name on the Mod Tool is as long as it has that.
JDM90 wrote: This
TehPikachuHat wrote: Thirded.
mfeile1974 wrote: Fourth....main reason I won't touch NMM is because I don't want my install folder touched
rcv wrote: me 5
The Vampire Dante wrote: @ mfeile1974

NMM has been using virtual installs for a while now.
bla08 wrote: NMM already offers a type of virtual installation system.
Arthmoor wrote: Personally I would hope not, or that it would be moved into an extension for those people who want that.
TehPikachuHat wrote: NMM virtualization system uses hardlinks, which clutter up your install folder. MO does it better.
ColdHarmonics wrote: The VFS of MO is second to none, let's hope the new NMM uses that. I may sound like a bit of a fanboy, but after grappling with a variety of virtual file systems, I just haven't found anything quite as nice as MO's.
moriador wrote: So, NMM uses "a type of virtualization system" already?

I don't know whether it does or not, or whether it's an option you have to enable in NMM.

All I *do* know is that when I install a mod with NMM: its assets are available when I load the CK to mod and when I load a game to play; moreover, I can easily locate those assets in my data folder, should I need to unpack/change/adjust/alter/move/rename/overwrite or delete them.

Last I checked, this was not the case with MO, since it was impossible to load a game without starting MO. And MO's file virtualization wasn't recognized by the CK.

With MO, if a mod had a single and simple problem, such as missing mipmaps for a few textures or an incorrect file path or even a single messed up mesh, it was not clear to me how to fix it. Whereas right now, I just fix them the straightforward and obvious way.

I have no idea if that's the case now -- or whether I'm simply totally wrong about MO -- because the description of the implementation was too confusing for me to really grasp fully. Forum threads and tutorials didn't help.

At the moment, with NMM, if I find that my data folder has unwanted stuff in it, I delete that stuff or manually shove it into a different folder. If I want a completely "clean" data folder, I unpack a backup archive of a vanilla install. I'm not sure what could be simpler than that.

Ultimately, for me, nothing beats actually looking at mod archives to see what's in them (and where) before installing anything into my data folder. I actually read the readme's. :D
xyon71 wrote: @ Moriador
While I can't speak to using the CK with MO, because I haven't used it, I can say that what you described is what I think most of the problem with MO.... people don't understand it so they don't like it.
How I came to understand it, was that MO "injects" a mods assets into the game's DATA folder when a mod is activated without actually writing it there, and possibly overwriting a file that is already there and permanently breaking a game.

You are ALWAYS using the clean backup of your DATA folder because you never change it..

The reality is, when you use MO, every mod you install creates a folder with the mod's name (e.g. Steamapps/Skyrim/ModOrganizer/mods/modxyz) and all of the assets are extracted there instead of your game's actual DATA folder. You then simply "activate" a mod when you want to use it, or deactivate it if you don't.
You have total freedom to go into the mod's folder and change or delete files at will if you please, either through MO or with Explorer. There is also a nifty function to "hide" a file in MO so it won't be used without deleting/destroying it.(great for texture/sound mods when you want to use some parts of 1 mod, and some parts of another mod)

While this all might be moot at this point, because who knows how the new tool is going to work, I hope I made the MO virtualization make a little more sense.

Yes, you launch your game from within MO, but I did the same with NMM, so it didn't bother me.
Tanker1985 wrote: @moriador, the CK works fine with MO, if you start it from within MO. It will see any plugins that are active in MO. The main issue is with MO's archive management, which allows it to see bsa assets as loose files. This might be the cause of inaccuracies with things like Xedit and CK.
Exoclyps wrote: Gotta voice my opinion here as well. The way MO does the Virtualization is just awesome. Separating everything by folder makes it so easy for me to keep track of it and the main reason why I love MO.
elezraita wrote: I don't understand why people can't figure out how to use MO. I get that it is different, but there are so many wonderful tutorials out there explaining how to get third party programs to work with MO. I install enbs through MO using Casmithy's EnbMan. I use TES5Edit, the CK, dyndolod, Bodyslide, Merge Plugins, FNIS, any and all Skyproc patchers, you name it. Through MO, I can see and manipulate my "Data Folder" as I could if my mods were installed my actual data folder. And guess what: my actual data folder is completely vanilla. I can edit my inis without actually editing my inis. What's even better is that I have another option as well: I can look at and manipulate my mods on an individual basis without having to search for assets in a mess of a regular data folder. I just go to the mods folder in the MO directory, and I can find the mod that contains the asset. Finally, I love that I can hide unnecessary plugins so they don't clutter my load order. I don't have to delete them. They are still contained in the mod folder in case I need them again.

I could go on and on, but people keep saying that NMM is better for people who make mods and do advanced things, and that NMM is more streamlined for beginners who want a simple process. Which is it? I'd say that those people just haven't taken the time to understand how smooth MO makes everything. It's perfect for beginners, because you install mods the same way you do with NMM: you click the download link and you click "install" from the installation tab. The difference is, that if you screw up the installation order, you simply change the mod's priority, as easily as you change your plugin load order instead of uninstalling all the out of order mods and reinstalling them in the correct order. Mod Organizer does not force its advanced features on amateur mod users. It's just that MO forces you to think a little differently than you might be used to. It has a slight learning curve that is really just a small paradigm shift curve.

Sorry for the rant. If people want use NMM because they think it's easier, more power to them. I just don't like all of the misinformation I've seen here regarding Mod Organizer in this thread.
UWShocks wrote: At least add an option for those that do want the files in the Data folders.. One of the reasons why I use NMM.
Makes tinkering around w/ CK and files (meshes, textures) much easier for me.
moriador wrote: @elezraita,

Thank you. That's a very full and descriptive answer! :)

I don't know why finding the information I need on how to get MO to work for me is so hard for me, but I read a lot of forum threads and watched more than a few tutorials. Almost all of them repeated the same information -- and not a single one explained how to use MO and the CK together. On the contrary, everything I read indicated that they didn't work together at all. To be sure, I couldn't find much anyway because almost all threads and tutorials seemed to assume that all you wanted to do was download and install mods. I found nothing specifically by or for mod authors EXCEPT the posts that said how using MO in conjunction with the CK was a royal PITA.

If the problem is that the info about MO is just disorganized and mostly outdated and sometimes simply incorrect, then the software is definitely worth looking into!

But -- seriously -- I've installed and used thousands of complex programs over the last four decades, so it's not as though I give up on software that easily.

I shall definitely give it another try!! (While waiting for the new mod manager to be developed.)
Arthmoor wrote: @elezraita: The mere fact that I'd even need to go through all that for every external tool I might want to use is one reason I don't like virtualized systems like that. Not everyone thinks it's such a great idea, which is why it belongs in an extension module for those who want it.
lithiumfox wrote: And I don't mind going through MO for every application. In fact, it's the least pain-in-the-butt system I've had to use for all of that.

Keep the VFS.


@moriador

You are probably right. There aren't really a whole lot of tutorials for using the CK and MO. I just learned how to use other third party programs and did the same thing for the CK. When I make a new plugin, it comes out in the overwrite mod and I just move it to its own mod at that point. I'll admit that getting scripts to compile from notepad++ while using MO was a royal pain. I had to download a mod to get it to work and then I had to write my own compile.bat. But after that, it was perfect. I honestly can see how people would get frustrated with that. I did, but I saw too many other advantages to MO to give up. My love of MO and all the misinformation I kept seeing led me too hyperbole. MO has its challenges, but I like it enough to spend time finding solutions. Not everyone is willing to do that. It depends on what one values. anyway, I made a tutorial a while ago about how I made a certain compatibility patch (because it was getting way more endorsements than it deserved). I wanted people to see how easy it was to make. In that tutorial, I used MO to open the CK, but that is about the extent of direct CK/MO tutorialage I know of. It's just that, except for setting up papyrus to compile from a text editor, it's basically the same as installing any other tool and launching it from MO.

@Arthmoor

I understand that not everyone thinks it's a good idea. I do; it works for me, as I explained. I understand that you like Wrye Bash. I like Wrye too, but I like MO more. I agree with you that virtualization a la MO should be an extension for NMO (as I'll call it for now). My purpose wasn't to tell people that their choice not to use MO is wrong. I'm perfectly fine with people using whatever tool they want. I just felt that I'd explain that MO isn't actually that hard to learn. I've seen quite a few comments expressing frustration about how certain tools don't work with MO at all, and I wanted to explain that they actually do. You understand that the way to get those tools to work in MO is the same way one gets the game to run in MO. If you don't like how those two things are accomplished, I'm fine with it. I just want people who don't understand the concept to get why those tools weren't working for them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 896
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

pedantic Enthusiast

pedantic

Posted
Posted (edited)
In response to post #43223160. #43223235, #43225810, #43226065, #43226570, #43226580, #43226675, #43226930, #43227145, #43227835, #43229000, #43229600, #43229700, #43231180, #43250055, #43250125, #43252635, #43253770, #43254560, #43254880 are all replies on the same post.


ContessaR wrote: Simple question: Will you be keeping MO's virtual installation/file system? That's all I want. Don't care what the name on the Mod Tool is as long as it has that.
JDM90 wrote: This
TehPikachuHat wrote: Thirded.
mfeile1974 wrote: Fourth....main reason I won't touch NMM is because I don't want my install folder touched
rcv wrote: me 5
The Vampire Dante wrote: @ mfeile1974

NMM has been using virtual installs for a while now.
bla08 wrote: NMM already offers a type of virtual installation system.
Arthmoor wrote: Personally I would hope not, or that it would be moved into an extension for those people who want that.
TehPikachuHat wrote: NMM virtualization system uses hardlinks, which clutter up your install folder. MO does it better.
ColdHarmonics wrote: The VFS of MO is second to none, let's hope the new NMM uses that. I may sound like a bit of a fanboy, but after grappling with a variety of virtual file systems, I just haven't found anything quite as nice as MO's.
moriador wrote: So, NMM uses "a type of virtualization system" already?

I don't know whether it does or not, or whether it's an option you have to enable in NMM.

All I *do* know is that when I install a mod with NMM: its assets are available when I load the CK to mod and when I load a game to play; moreover, I can easily locate those assets in my data folder, should I need to unpack/change/adjust/alter/move/rename/overwrite or delete them.

Last I checked, this was not the case with MO, since it was impossible to load a game without starting MO. And MO's file virtualization wasn't recognized by the CK.

With MO, if a mod had a single and simple problem, such as missing mipmaps for a few textures or an incorrect file path or even a single messed up mesh, it was not clear to me how to fix it. Whereas right now, I just fix them the straightforward and obvious way.

I have no idea if that's the case now -- or whether I'm simply totally wrong about MO -- because the description of the implementation was too confusing for me to really grasp fully. Forum threads and tutorials didn't help.

At the moment, with NMM, if I find that my data folder has unwanted stuff in it, I delete that stuff or manually shove it into a different folder. If I want a completely "clean" data folder, I unpack a backup archive of a vanilla install. I'm not sure what could be simpler than that.

Ultimately, for me, nothing beats actually looking at mod archives to see what's in them (and where) before installing anything into my data folder. I actually read the readme's. :D
xyon71 wrote: @ Moriador
While I can't speak to using the CK with MO, because I haven't used it, I can say that what you described is what I think most of the problem with MO.... people don't understand it so they don't like it.
How I came to understand it, was that MO "injects" a mods assets into the game's DATA folder when a mod is activated without actually writing it there, and possibly overwriting a file that is already there and permanently breaking a game.

You are ALWAYS using the clean backup of your DATA folder because you never change it..

The reality is, when you use MO, every mod you install creates a folder with the mod's name (e.g. Steamapps/Skyrim/ModOrganizer/mods/modxyz) and all of the assets are extracted there instead of your game's actual DATA folder. You then simply "activate" a mod when you want to use it, or deactivate it if you don't.
You have total freedom to go into the mod's folder and change or delete files at will if you please, either through MO or with Explorer. There is also a nifty function to "hide" a file in MO so it won't be used without deleting/destroying it.(great for texture/sound mods when you want to use some parts of 1 mod, and some parts of another mod)

While this all might be moot at this point, because who knows how the new tool is going to work, I hope I made the MO virtualization make a little more sense.

Yes, you launch your game from within MO, but I did the same with NMM, so it didn't bother me.
Tanker1985 wrote: @moriador, the CK works fine with MO, if you start it from within MO. It will see any plugins that are active in MO. The main issue is with MO's archive management, which allows it to see bsa assets as loose files. This might be the cause of inaccuracies with things like Xedit and CK.
Exoclyps wrote: Gotta voice my opinion here as well. The way MO does the Virtualization is just awesome. Separating everything by folder makes it so easy for me to keep track of it and the main reason why I love MO.
elezraita wrote: I don't understand why people can't figure out how to use MO. I get that it is different, but there are so many wonderful tutorials out there explaining how to get third party programs to work with MO. I install enbs through MO using Casmithy's EnbMan. I use TES5Edit, the CK, dyndolod, Bodyslide, Merge Plugins, FNIS, any and all Skyproc patchers, you name it. Through MO, I can see and manipulate my "Data Folder" as I could if my mods were installed my actual data folder. And guess what: my actual data folder is completely vanilla. I can edit my inis without actually editing my inis. What's even better is that I have another option as well: I can look at and manipulate my mods on an individual basis without having to search for assets in a mess of a regular data folder. I just go to the mods folder in the MO directory, and I can find the mod that contains the asset. Finally, I love that I can hide unnecessary plugins so they don't clutter my load order. I don't have to delete them. They are still contained in the mod folder in case I need them again.

I could go on and on, but people keep saying that NMM is better for people who make mods and do advanced things, and that NMM is more streamlined for beginners who want a simple process. Which is it? I'd say that those people just haven't taken the time to understand how smooth MO makes everything. It's perfect for beginners, because you install mods the same way you do with NMM: you click the download link and you click "install" from the installation tab. The difference is, that if you screw up the installation order, you simply change the mod's priority, as easily as you change your plugin load order instead of uninstalling all the out of order mods and reinstalling them in the correct order. Mod Organizer does not force its advanced features on amateur mod users. It's just that MO forces you to think a little differently than you might be used to. It has a slight learning curve that is really just a small paradigm shift curve.

Sorry for the rant. If people want use NMM because they think it's easier, more power to them. I just don't like all of the misinformation I've seen here regarding Mod Organizer in this thread.
UWShocks wrote: At least add an option for those that do want the files in the Data folders.. One of the reasons why I use NMM.
Makes tinkering around w/ CK and files (meshes, textures) much easier for me.
moriador wrote: @elezraita,

Thank you. That's a very full and descriptive answer! :)

I don't know why finding the information I need on how to get MO to work for me is so hard for me, but I read a lot of forum threads and watched more than a few tutorials. Almost all of them repeated the same information -- and not a single one explained how to use MO and the CK together. On the contrary, everything I read indicated that they didn't work together at all. To be sure, I couldn't find much anyway because almost all threads and tutorials seemed to assume that all you wanted to do was download and install mods. I found nothing specifically by or for mod authors EXCEPT the posts that said how using MO in conjunction with the CK was a royal PITA.

If the problem is that the info about MO is just disorganized and mostly outdated and sometimes simply incorrect, then the software is definitely worth looking into!

But -- seriously -- I've installed and used thousands of complex programs over the last four decades, so it's not as though I give up on software that easily.

I shall definitely give it another try!! (While waiting for the new mod manager to be developed.)
Arthmoor wrote: @elezraita: The mere fact that I'd even need to go through all that for every external tool I might want to use is one reason I don't like virtualized systems like that. Not everyone thinks it's such a great idea, which is why it belongs in an extension module for those who want it.
lithiumfox wrote: And I don't mind going through MO for every application. In fact, it's the least pain-in-the-butt system I've had to use for all of that.

Keep the VFS.
elezraita wrote: @moriador

You are probably right. There aren't really a whole lot of tutorials for using the CK and MO. I just learned how to use other third party programs and did the same thing for the CK. When I make a new plugin, it comes out in the overwrite mod and I just move it to its own mod at that point. I'll admit that getting scripts to compile from notepad++ while using MO was a royal pain. I had to download a mod to get it to work and then I had to write my own compile.bat. But after that, it was perfect. I honestly can see how people would get frustrated with that. I did, but I saw too many other advantages to MO to give up. My love of MO and all the misinformation I kept seeing led me too hyperbole. MO has its challenges, but I like it enough to spend time finding solutions. Not everyone is willing to do that. It depends on what one values. anyway, I made a tutorial a while ago about how I made a certain compatibility patch (because it was getting way more endorsements than it deserved). I wanted people to see how easy it was to make. In that tutorial, I used MO to open the CK, but that is about the extent of direct CK/MO tutorialage I know of. It's just that, except for setting up papyrus to compile from a text editor, it's basically the same as installing any other tool and launching it from MO.

@Arthmoor

I understand that not everyone thinks it's a good idea. I do; it works for me, as I explained. I understand that you like Wrye Bash. I like Wrye too, but I like MO more. I agree with you that virtualization a la MO should be an extension for NMO (as I'll call it for now). My purpose wasn't to tell people that their choice not to use MO is wrong. I'm perfectly fine with people using whatever tool they want. I just felt that I'd explain that MO isn't actually that hard to learn. I've seen quite a few comments expressing frustration about how certain tools don't work with MO at all, and I wanted to explain that they actually do. You understand that the way to get those tools to work in MO is the same way one gets the game to run in MO. If you don't like how those two things are accomplished, I'm fine with it. I just want people who don't understand the concept to get why those tools weren't working for them.


All that? All that what, Arthmoor.

You click on the executable ( The gears ) Type a name then click on the [ ... ] to navigate to the .exe and, well, that's all there is to it.

The external programs run from within MO aren't virtual at all, they simply read from the virtual .esm and .esp files and write back the result, from the CK as an example, to the overwrite folder with no harm done. If you're happy with what you've accomplished just drag and drop the thing onto the existing mod to update it or simply rename it and create a replacement mod. It's how I keep different versions of the self same mod. Childs play.

Edit: Yep, I even run Wrye from MO and it dumps the bashed patch in the overwrite, too. Edited by pedantic
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elezraita Enthusiast

elezraita

Posted
Posted
In response to post #43254180.


Sharlikran wrote:

This is best viewed from the forum.

If you think MOs vfs is useless or if you think symbolic / hard links are wrong or direct installation is bad you just don't have all the facts or haven't considered how others want to mod.

Which is why I want to offer alternatives with the new manager and not presume to know what's best for each individual.


For me it's not about whether or not vfs or SymLinks are better, worse, or more efficient. Sometimes when I share an opinion it's not to convince someone I am right. I'm not always trying to prove anything one way or another. I just explain how I feel about it, and leave it at that.

I'm seeing a lot of good reasons about why people like things and what they want or don't want in a mod manager. Which is fine because everyone has their personal preference. My personal preference is that the files are copied directly to the data folder. However, that has nothing to do with the features of the mod manager itself.

What I'd like to suggest is to watch Gopher's video titled The ELDER SCROLLS Formula #1: Why do people love TES? Because in the video Gopher is suggesting that Bethesda needs to go back and look at all the things about Elder scrolls that people loved. People always talk about what they want added because they feel it's missing or what needs to be removed because they hate it. However, Gopher says that it's a sad fact that people don't talk about the things they are really happy with. So what things about mod managers am I happy with? What things are you happy with? What really provides you with what you need to install and manage mods?

What I like when managing my mods:

  • Download the file form the nexus by clicking on the webpage
  • Enable or completely disable how files are installed to the Data folder (vfs as mentioned)
  • Move a file higher or lower in the list of installers to overwrite files. Because uninstalling files and overwriting files in a certain order is difficult and can easily be done wrong. Which means you have to start over. Not to mention that it is easier to know where to drag the file and which files need to be overwritten when you can visually see conflicting files.
  • See at a glance from the list of installers (colored indicator or icon) when files from the archive differ from the files in the data folder
  • Manual way to refresh the CRC tracking of files in the Data folder, installer folders, and archives
  • Tracking mod to monitor an external installation (EXE installer or manual install) when finished all new files tracked are converted into an archive or organized into a folder for instalation. Eliminating the need for the external installer.
  • Report of all installed plugin files (copied to clipboard)
  • Localization via Poedit
  • Report of all installed mods downloaded from the nexus (name of the mod installed - copied to clipboard)
  • Organize my list of files into categories both custom (I make up the category) and pre-determined categories like those used on the Nexus. Hide empty categories to avoid clutter.
  • Double click the mod to view the archive's contents.
  • Open the location of the archive or folder in the windows explorer
  • Unpack the archive into a folder and install the files from the folder instead (without closing the mod manager)
  • Rename or Delete the archive or folder
  • Tell the mod manager what folder should be considered the Data folder (Where the plugin and resources are) Because I sometimes see archives with nested folders that I'm not interested in like "My Mod\it has a name\I want to have screen shots\then the plugin and other files"
  • Option to remove superfluous folders previously mentioned but to the mod manager it's still considered the same file and same version I downloaded from the Nexus.
  • A way to indicate which file and version it is if the information wasn't or isn't available to suppress warnings
  • Display a list of all the files (from the installer folder or archive) with their directories that I can cut and paste anywhere I may need (copy to clipboard)
  • A way to specify any files (not pre-determined, my choice) I want to skip (screen shots) when installing the file and have suggested options offered (readme files for example)
  • Tabs or some way to see at a glance
    • all the files in the archive
    • which files match what is in the data folder and the archive or folder
    • which files are missing (I didn't skip them)
    • which files are not the same in the data folder and the archive or folder (I edited the plugin in the CK so it changed or the CK compiled a script)
    • orphan files in the data folder but not part of an installer (the ck built a new face gen file or topic info file)
    • a list of all files with the same name and extension (they will conflict) from any folder, archive, or BSA/BA2 file
    • any skipped files
  • A way to install files by
    • folder - no script - (00 Main, 01 Textures, 02 Alt Textures, 03 Body Slide, 04 Script Extender Plugins)
    • by OBMM
    • by C based scripts
    • NMM XML or Fomod
    • any other format that has been previously available (Even BAIN if possible)
  • A wysiwyg installer creator (BAT) that lets me
    • create a complex install archive by specifying folders and dragging and dropping files
    • a way to add pics and descriptions as needed
    • Complex enough to cover any situation and provide one file for users to download
    • I don't want to manually edit an xml or script file I want it built for me
    • A way to detect any plugin, texture, or file and only offer certain install options based on installed files (don't show a patch for Moda when it isn't installed)
  • Ways to link to programs I find useful for modding such as LOOT, xEdit, NifSkope, Photoshop, Blender (create custom links as well as default options)
  • A watchdog of sorts (not necessarily a DLL of the same name) that will notice when a file is added or removed from in the data folder and updates my list of plugins. The routine wouldn't auto activate the mod but would cleanse my load order
    • alters plugins.txt or loadorder.txt when applicable
    • loadorder.txt not used by Fallout 4 and future games with star load order
  • If a mod author or user changes the ESM flag (of an ESP file) of a plugin the mod manager automatically moves the plugin into the ESM group above all the ESP files and alters load order files
  • A watchdog that sees I removed an installer (file or folder) but the files are in the data folder and removes the files. Only tracks files installed with the mod manager and any remaining files become orphaned files.
  • A way to clean out the data folder of all files that are not installed by the game or Construction Kit (vanilla install) Also leaving behind all files currently in the data folder from an active installer archive or folder
  • A way to see the save game and which files were installed at the time the save game was made
  • A way to build a report of which mods were used in the save game (copy to clipboard)
  • A way to make different folders for my save games (set SLocalSavePath in game's INI to avoid copying files)
  • Copy save games to other folders I have created (Other play through)
  • Colored indicators to show
    • which mods in the save game are present and in the same location as the save game's header
    • present but at a different location
    • missing from my load order
    • separate color to show all files are present and have the exact same load order as the save game's header
  • A report that shows mods that have been added or removed from my load order compared to the save game's header
  • Activate only the files in the save game's header
  • Sort the mods (excluding missing mods) in the same order as indicated in the save game header. Remaining files append to end of the list.
  • Rename the mod in the save game header (When mod author changes the name but it's the same mod) unless author indicates not to because of extensive changes (doing the same to script extender co-saves)
  • Display the screen shot from the save game header so I know how I want to organize the file
  • A way to alter the INI files with commonly suggested settings that I can check and uncheck to apply them without knowing where the files are located on my HD
  • A way to restore the default INI files

FO4Edit, TES5Edit, xEdit for short, just does what it does well. It doesn't sort or install files. I don't think Wrye ever preferred that Wrye Bash had mod management features. He and I only talked a few times and I don't remember for sure. However, some people wanted features not available from other mod managers. What if Wrye Bash just built the Bash Patch and did it well?

Currently "ONE" volunteer is refactoring Wrye Bash and has darn near completely rewritten the entire program. However, none of that has anything to do with building the Bash Patch. The current volunteer looks for ways to remove binaries and unneeded features. I wouldn't want to see all the development that has gone into Wrye Bash go to waste. What if Wrye Bash was separated into Mod Manager and Bash Patcher? I can't write in Python but I do work on the Wrye iterations for all the various games both for personal benefit and to benefit those who enjoy using Wrye. I know for the most part what files have to do with the the Patcher routines having dome some work on it.

Do you want to start from scratch? How long would it take to start form scratch and provide the above features? Do you want to use NMM as a base? Do you want to use Wrye Bash as a base? Where do you start?


Sharlikran, while I'd say that about 95% of these features are available in MO, interestingly enough, it was fairly apparent that you were referring to Bash. I have an unrelated question though. I was under the impression that the xEdit scripting language was something related to Python. I'd heard that somewhere. Obviously, I was mistaken, as you claim not to know python. So, what language is it, and where does one go to learn it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sharlikran Rising Star

Sharlikran

Posted
Posted (edited)
In response to post #43254180. #43255095 is also a reply to the same post.


Sharlikran wrote:

This is best viewed from the forum.

If you think MOs vfs is useless or if you think symbolic / hard links are wrong or direct installation is bad you just don't have all the facts or haven't considered how others want to mod.

Which is why I want to offer alternatives with the new manager and not presume to know what's best for each individual.


For me it's not about whether or not vfs or SymLinks are better, worse, or more efficient. Sometimes when I share an opinion it's not to convince someone I am right. I'm not always trying to prove anything one way or another. I just explain how I feel about it, and leave it at that.

I'm seeing a lot of good reasons about why people like things and what they want or don't want in a mod manager. Which is fine because everyone has their personal preference. My personal preference is that the files are copied directly to the data folder. However, that has nothing to do with the features of the mod manager itself.

What I'd like to suggest is to watch Gopher's video titled The ELDER SCROLLS Formula #1: Why do people love TES? Because in the video Gopher is suggesting that Bethesda needs to go back and look at all the things about Elder scrolls that people loved. People always talk about what they want added because they feel it's missing or what needs to be removed because they hate it. However, Gopher says that it's a sad fact that people don't talk about the things they are really happy with. So what things about mod managers am I happy with? What things are you happy with? What really provides you with what you need to install and manage mods?

 

All features in yellow are not offered by my current mod manager and would be nice features to have.

What I like when managing my mods:

  • Download the file form the nexus by clicking on the webpage
  • Enable or completely disable how files are installed to the Data folder (vfs as mentioned)
  • Move a file higher or lower in the list of installers to overwrite files. Because uninstalling files and overwriting files in a certain order is difficult and can easily be done wrong. Which means you have to start over. Not to mention that it is easier to know where to drag the file and which files need to be overwritten when you can visually see conflicting files.
  • See at a glance from the list of installers (colored indicator or icon) when files from the archive differ from the files in the data folder
  • Manual way to refresh the CRC tracking of files in the Data folder, installer folders, and archives
  • Tracking mod to monitor an external installation (EXE installer or manual install) when finished all new files tracked are converted into an archive or organized into a folder for instalation. Eliminating the need for the external installer.
  • Report of all installed plugin files (copied to clipboard)
  • Localization via Poedit
  • Report of all installed mods downloaded from the nexus (name of the mod installed - copied to clipboard)
  • Add my own custom categories I can use to organize my mods
  • Organize mods by pre-determined categories like those used on the Nexus. Hide empty categories to avoid clutter.
  • Double click the mod to view the archive's contents.
  • Open the location of the archive or folder in the windows explorer
  • Unpack the archive into a folder and install the files from the folder instead (without closing the mod manager)
  • Rename or Delete the archive or folder
  • Tell the mod manager what folder should be considered the Data folder (Where the plugin and resources are) Because I sometimes see archives with nested folders that I'm not interested in like "My Mod\it has a name\I want to have screen shots\then the plugin and other files"
  • Option to remove superfluous folders previously mentioned but to the mod manager it's still considered the same file and same version I downloaded from the Nexus.
  • A way to indicate which file and version it is if the information wasn't or isn't available to suppress warnings
  • Display a list of all the files (from the installer folder or archive) with their directories that I can cut and paste anywhere I may need (copy to clipboard)
  • A way to specify any files (not pre-determined, my choice) just anything I don't want (advanced users only)
  • Suggested options offered to skip certain file types (readme files for example)
  • Track orphan files in the data folder but not part of an installer (the ck built a new face gen file or topic info file)
  • Tabs or some way to see at a glance
    • all the files in the archive
    • which files match what is in the data folder and the archive or folder
    • which files are missing (I didn't skip them)
    • which files are not the same in the data folder and the archive or folder (I edited the plugin in the CK so it changed or the CK compiled a script)
    • a list of all files with the same name and extension (they will conflict) from any folder, archive, or BSA/BA2 file
    • any skipped files
  • A way to install files by
    • folder - no script - (00 Main, 01 Textures, 02 Alt Textures, 03 Body Slide, 04 Script Extender Plugins)
    • Install BAIN package
    • by OBMM
    • by C based scripts
    • NMM XML or Fomod
    • any other format that has been previously available
  • A wysiwyg installer creator (BAT) that lets me
    • create a complex install archive by specifying folders and dragging and dropping files
    • a way to add pics and descriptions as needed
    • Complex enough to cover any situation and provide one file for users to download
    • I don't want to manually edit an xml or script file I want it built for me
    • A way to detect any plugin, texture, or file and only offer certain install options based on installed files (don't show a patch for Moda when it isn't installed)
  • Ways to link to programs I find useful for modding such as LOOT, xEdit, NifSkope, Photoshop, Blender (create custom links as well as default options)
  • A watchdog of sorts (not necessarily a DLL of the same name) that will notice when a file is added or removed from in the data folder and updates my list of plugins. The routine wouldn't auto activate the mod but would cleanse my load order
    • alters plugins.txt or loadorder.txt when applicable
    • loadorder.txt not used by Fallout 4 and future games with star load order
  • If a mod author or user changes the ESM flag (of an ESP file) of a plugin the mod manager automatically moves the plugin into the ESM group above all the ESP files and alters load order files
  • A watchdog that sees I removed an installer (file or folder) but the files are in the data folder and removes the files. Only tracks files installed with the mod manager and any remaining files become orphaned files.
  • A way to clean out the data folder of all files that are not installed by the game or Construction Kit (vanilla install) Also leaving behind all files currently in the data folder from an active installer archive or folder
  • A way to see the save game and which files were installed at the time the save game was made
  • A way to build a report of which mods were used in the save game (copy to clipboard)
  • A way to make different folders for my save games (set SLocalSavePath in game's INI to avoid copying files)
  • Copy save games to other folders I have created (Other play through)
  • Colored indicators to show
    • which mods in the save game are present and in the same location as the save game's header
    • present but at a different location
    • missing from my load order
    • separate color to show all files are present and have the exact same load order as the save game's header
  • A report that shows mods that have been added or removed from my load order compared to the save game's header
  • Activate only the files in the save game's header
  • Sort the mods (excluding missing mods) in the same order as indicated in the save game header. Remaining files append to end of the list.
  • Rename the mod in the save game header (When mod author changes the name but it's the same mod) unless author indicates not to because of extensive changes (doing the same to script extender co-saves)
  • Display the screen shot from the save game header so I know how I want to organize the file
  • A way to alter the INI files with commonly suggested settings that I can check and uncheck to apply them without knowing where the files are located on my HD
  • A way to restore the default INI files

FO4Edit, TES5Edit, xEdit for short, just does what it does well. It doesn't sort or install files. I don't think Wrye ever preferred that Wrye Bash had mod management features. He and I only talked a few times and I don't remember for sure. However, some people wanted features not available from other mod managers. What if Wrye Bash just built the Bash Patch and did it well?

Currently "ONE" volunteer is refactoring Wrye Bash and has darn near completely rewritten the entire program. However, none of that has anything to do with building the Bash Patch. The current volunteer looks for ways to remove binaries and unneeded features. I wouldn't want to see all the development that has gone into Wrye Bash go to waste. What if Wrye Bash was separated into Mod Manager and Bash Patcher? I can't write in Python but I do work on the Wrye iterations for all the various games both for personal benefit and to benefit those who enjoy using Wrye. I know for the most part what files have to do with the the Patcher routines having dome some work on it.

Do you want to start from scratch? How long would it take to start form scratch and provide the above features? Could you use existing code and add to it?

elezraita wrote: Sharlikran, while I'd say that about 95% of these features are available in MO, interestingly enough, it was fairly apparent that you were referring to Bash. I have an unrelated question though. I was under the impression that the xEdit scripting language was something related to Python. I'd heard that somewhere. Obviously, I was mistaken, as you claim not to know python. So, what language is it, and where does one go to learn it?


Irrespective of what I am talking about I listed features I like, that's it. Hard not to use examples of what I am familiar with.

I don't know Python but I can manipulate the code to do extremely basic things to maintain Wrye. Mainly I update record definitions from xEdit to Wrye Bash/Smash/Flash.

The scripting in xEdit is Delphi/Pascal syntax not Python. No way to learn it really unless you refer to Delphi references I suppose. The scripting functions available are listed here. Edited by Sharlikran
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FreeWare Newbie

FreeWare

Posted
Posted
In response to post #43224730. #43229715, #43231195, #43231225, #43234520, #43237900, #43238095, #43248580, #43248780 are all replies on the same post.


fgambler wrote: What will be the name of the new app? NMO (Nexus Mod Organizer)? :D
Tannin42 wrote: Suggestions are welcome... :D
GuardianAngel42 wrote: NNMM: New Nexus Mod Manager.
renthal311 wrote: hahaha Fgambler, I'm with tears in his eyes :D :D
pStyl3 wrote: NexMO = Nexus Mod Organizer
HadToRegister wrote: I like what someone previously suggested but without the 'x'

NeMO = Nexus Mod Organizer
Thallassa wrote: I think NeMO is the best one I've heard, but I'm still partial to "NOMM" (not quite sure how that acronym works out but it's cute).
fgambler wrote: NeMO kinda sounds nice but not so serious, it's a name either attached to a fish or a nintendo 8-bit game :P
HadToRegister wrote: I was thinking of a famous Submarine Captain from a book by Jules Verne ;)


How about NMM v2.0? Or 1.0 could work too. The name doesn't really need to change, it's already as good as it can be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Qrygg Explorer

Qrygg

Posted
Posted (edited)
I have to say, other than jumping through hoops to get MO to function properly due to various bugs and whatnot, MO is NOT more complicated to use than NMM. In fact, I find it simpler. Install, download and install your mods, check the box, play the game. Couldn't be simpler. In addition, your install folder doesn't get messed up, and you don't have to periodically re-install the game because of uninstalling mods that replaced key game components. Edited by Qrygg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tannin42 Veteran

Tannin42

Posted
Posted
In response to post #43240755. #43241360, #43241745, #43244095, #43245180, #43246510 are all replies on the same post.


GamerPoets wrote: One thing that I'm curious about and I didn't seem to find anywhere...

Will there still be (or the potential to retain) the ability (from MO) to view individual files that are being overwritten by others mods so that you can easily skim through them (each mod) and hide particular files from each mod?

ex: 1 texture from this mod (hide), 1 mesh from that mod(hide), so on... ?

One thing that I loved about M.O. was if I installed different texture mods I didn't have to worry about loosing the pieces of one that is already installed when installing new mods that overwrite parts of them. I could click a button and have a file from any mod at any time hidden or activated.
christoph392008 wrote: Seconded. Love that feature.
TehPikachuHat wrote: Thirded.
ElRizzo wrote: Foured.
Achromatis wrote: Fifthed?! This is exactly the sort of thing that currently makes me use MO over NMM.
yuiop321 wrote: Sixth'd


I have to be a bit careful how I answer questions like these. ;)
This feature is on our to-do list and I see no reason why we would drop it but I can't give you any guarantee.
I can also not promise if it will be in the initial release or if it will be added at a later time because we haven't committed to a release-strategy here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spartanops101 Newbie

spartanops101

Posted
Posted (edited)
In response to post #43224730. #43229715, #43231195, #43231225, #43234520, #43237900, #43238095, #43248580, #43248780, #43256345 are all replies on the same post.


fgambler wrote: What will be the name of the new app? NMO (Nexus Mod Organizer)? :D
Tannin42 wrote: Suggestions are welcome... :D
GuardianAngel42 wrote: NNMM: New Nexus Mod Manager.
renthal311 wrote: hahaha Fgambler, I'm with tears in his eyes :D :D
pStyl3 wrote: NexMO = Nexus Mod Organizer
HadToRegister wrote: I like what someone previously suggested but without the 'x'

NeMO = Nexus Mod Organizer
Thallassa wrote: I think NeMO is the best one I've heard, but I'm still partial to "NOMM" (not quite sure how that acronym works out but it's cute).
fgambler wrote: NeMO kinda sounds nice but not so serious, it's a name either attached to a fish or a nintendo 8-bit game :P
HadToRegister wrote: I was thinking of a famous Submarine Captain from a book by Jules Verne ;)
FreeWare wrote: How about NMM v2.0? Or 1.0 could work too. The name doesn't really need to change, it's already as good as it can be.


NMUMMMO - Nexus Mod's Ultimate Mod Manager and Mod Organiser Edited by spartanops101
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...