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

[Gruftlord]

In response to post #43213860. #43214125, #43214650, #43216125 are all replies on the same post.

renthal311 wrote: one thing I do not like the NMM that creates a 'virtual installation folder mods', it looks like this: install for Skyrim 50 mods, weighing 12GB, NMM creates additional 12GB unnecessary ballast on my hard, cleanrooms think: if I mods already installed and placed files in Skyrim, what I 12GB redundant copies? ? It is a bad solution, the only thing I noticed, I love NMM :D , REN

Gruftlord wrote: It's not actually taking up twice the space, that is a display error in windows explorer. I hope they stay with this technique of 'virtualization', because it sounded way more robust than MO's (actual) virtualization.

Thallassa wrote: After actually testing a few months ago, NMM is not robust >_< That is, it lets you run things directly on the skyrim folder instead of launching through NMM, but that's the only advantage. Things made by executables still aren't managed (they are in MO), NMM still needs to "remember" things (MO and Bash both just compare files in the folders, if a file exists in the mod folder, it's managed, not so for NMM even now), it's overall kind of a mess.

(Also NMM is really slow compared to MO, to be fair I was testing it with very large mods and smaller mods probably there would be no difference).

I hope they keep something more similar to MO's system, but keep it simple. No categories. No buggy as hell compatibility/install order checks. No buggy as hell "archive management." Give us an optional plugin to unpack BSAs right into the mod folder (the way MO does now), but make that option even more difficult to turn on. And for the love of god put every file back in the overwrite, instead of thinking you know where it goes! But keep each mod in its own, totally independent folder, and have *all* file operations be done *on that folder* instead of on the base game folder, so *everything* you do stays managed without having to think about it.

renthal311 wrote: as a mistake? clearly shows 12GB folder, I NMM from the beginning, but once something like that was, and it works well, never mind, I always I remove the files from this folder, Skyrim serves me to learn modding, so very often I do reinstallation, and again and again installs NMM :D

NMM writes symlinks in the data folder for the files it manages. (win explorer counts the disk space of such files twice). The system is slow with large amounts of files (i.e. when you have a lot of lose files instead of the MUCH preferred BSA) and a slow disk. With BSAs and/or SSDs NMM is very fast (though admittedly, with common stuff like SMIM, that may already not be the case.)

The robustness of NMM's solution is not in the way the program did shuffle all these symlinks. Yes, that leaves something to be desired. The robustness is in that the system relies on functions supported by the filesystem and was thus advertised as being more easily applied to a wider range of games and doesn't require third party programs (or the game exe for that matter) to run through the mod manager.

[Magickingdom]

I just want a simple powerful mod installer/uninstaller. Profiles smofiles, don't need don't want. Just install it right and uninstall it clean. Keep it simple. If it works, don't fix it. I dislike both current mod managers strongly. Constantly both caused me grief. So, I use an ancient version of nmm for skyrim and manual install for FO4. The virtual stuff is virtual trouble. I do hope keep it simple options will be available in the new version. Yeah, I'm an older guy and I hate it when some new thing comes along and rocks my boat. :P Oh, one more thing, make the text big enough so I can read it.

Anyway, smooth sailing to you in the next year. :)

[Balx2]

In response to post #43213860. #43214125, #43214650, #43216125, #43216490 are all replies on the same post.

renthal311 wrote: one thing I do not like the NMM that creates a 'virtual installation folder mods', it looks like this: install for Skyrim 50 mods, weighing 12GB, NMM creates additional 12GB unnecessary ballast on my hard, cleanrooms think: if I mods already installed and placed files in Skyrim, what I 12GB redundant copies? ? It is a bad solution, the only thing I noticed, I love NMM :D , REN

Gruftlord wrote: It's not actually taking up twice the space, that is a display error in windows explorer. I hope they stay with this technique of 'virtualization', because it sounded way more robust than MO's (actual) virtualization.

Thallassa wrote: After actually testing a few months ago, NMM is not robust >_< That is, it lets you run things directly on the skyrim folder instead of launching through NMM, but that's the only advantage. Things made by executables still aren't managed (they are in MO), NMM still needs to "remember" things (MO and Bash both just compare files in the folders, if a file exists in the mod folder, it's managed, not so for NMM even now), it's overall kind of a mess.

(Also NMM is really slow compared to MO, to be fair I was testing it with very large mods and smaller mods probably there would be no difference).

I hope they keep something more similar to MO's system, but keep it simple. No categories. No buggy as hell compatibility/install order checks. No buggy as hell "archive management." Give us an optional plugin to unpack BSAs right into the mod folder (the way MO does now), but make that option even more difficult to turn on. And for the love of god put every file back in the overwrite, instead of thinking you know where it goes! But keep each mod in its own, totally independent folder, and have *all* file operations be done *on that folder* instead of on the base game folder, so *everything* you do stays managed without having to think about it.

renthal311 wrote: as a mistake? clearly shows 12GB folder, I NMM from the beginning, but once something like that was, and it works well, never mind, I always I remove the files from this folder, Skyrim serves me to learn modding, so very often I do reinstallation, and again and again installs NMM :D

Gruftlord wrote: NMM writes symlinks in the data folder for the files it manages. (win explorer counts the disk space of such files twice). The system is slow with large amounts of files (i.e. when you have a lot of lose files instead of the MUCH preferred BSA) and a slow disk. With BSAs and/or SSDs NMM is very fast (though admittedly, with common stuff like SMIM, that may already not be the case.)

The robustness of NMM's solution is not in the way the program did shuffle all these symlinks. Yes, that leaves something to be desired. The robustness is in that the system relies on functions supported by the filesystem and was thus advertised as being more easily applied to a wider range of games and doesn't require third party programs (or the game exe for that matter) to run through the mod manager.

If you barely speak English, please refrain from posting in it and instead post in what ever language is your native language.
Food for thought: 1) Others probably know your language, you are not alone on this planet in speaking it. 2) Google translate is easier to understand then your written English.
#2 is not a good thing.

[Arthmoor]

In response to post #43210430. #43215310, #43215490, #43215920 are all replies on the same post.

jim_uk wrote: Please can we get a mode for us old stick in the muds who still do everything manually and only want something to enable mods and change the load order? I'm still using 0.52.3.

kingtobbe wrote: This works perfectly for that. It doesn't disable mods beyond unchecking the esp though. Of course if it did, it wouldn't be simple anymore :)

http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/13671/?

vram1974 wrote: You're never too old to save time. If a veritable moron like myself can figure out mod managers then anybody can.

jim_uk wrote: It's nothing to do with figuring them out, it's that I don't need all the other stuff, I've been installing mods since 2002, I know what I'm doing and prefer to do things myself.

@kingtobbe I used something similar for FO4, it saved me from upgrading and risking breaking my older games.

I'm with jim_uk on this one. If I were to be convinced to use this new NMM, I'd want it to be straightforward and without all the file system virtualization stuff. And it would need to be at least as robust about handling the Data folder as Wrye Bash is now.

Oh, and please, for the love of Talos, leave the BSA unpacking to other tools where it belongs! Edited October 13, 2016 by Arthmoor

[Charmareian]

I defiantly choose MO over NMM for my Mod Manager. Looks like once I again I can proudly use NMM :p Edited October 13, 2016 by Charmareian

[renthal311]

In response to post #43213860. #43214125, #43214650, #43216125, #43216490, #43216630 are all replies on the same post.

renthal311 wrote: one thing I do not like the NMM that creates a 'virtual installation folder mods', it looks like this: install for Skyrim 50 mods, weighing 12GB, NMM creates additional 12GB unnecessary ballast on my hard, cleanrooms think: if I mods already installed and placed files in Skyrim, what I 12GB redundant copies? ? It is a bad solution, the only thing I noticed, I love NMM :D , REN

Gruftlord wrote: It's not actually taking up twice the space, that is a display error in windows explorer. I hope they stay with this technique of 'virtualization', because it sounded way more robust than MO's (actual) virtualization.

Thallassa wrote: After actually testing a few months ago, NMM is not robust >_< That is, it lets you run things directly on the skyrim folder instead of launching through NMM, but that's the only advantage. Things made by executables still aren't managed (they are in MO), NMM still needs to "remember" things (MO and Bash both just compare files in the folders, if a file exists in the mod folder, it's managed, not so for NMM even now), it's overall kind of a mess.

(Also NMM is really slow compared to MO, to be fair I was testing it with very large mods and smaller mods probably there would be no difference).

I hope they keep something more similar to MO's system, but keep it simple. No categories. No buggy as hell compatibility/install order checks. No buggy as hell "archive management." Give us an optional plugin to unpack BSAs right into the mod folder (the way MO does now), but make that option even more difficult to turn on. And for the love of god put every file back in the overwrite, instead of thinking you know where it goes! But keep each mod in its own, totally independent folder, and have *all* file operations be done *on that folder* instead of on the base game folder, so *everything* you do stays managed without having to think about it.

renthal311 wrote: as a mistake? clearly shows 12GB folder, I NMM from the beginning, but once something like that was, and it works well, never mind, I always I remove the files from this folder, Skyrim serves me to learn modding, so very often I do reinstallation, and again and again installs NMM :D

Gruftlord wrote: NMM writes symlinks in the data folder for the files it manages. (win explorer counts the disk space of such files twice). The system is slow with large amounts of files (i.e. when you have a lot of lose files instead of the MUCH preferred BSA) and a slow disk. With BSAs and/or SSDs NMM is very fast (though admittedly, with common stuff like SMIM, that may already not be the case.)

The robustness of NMM's solution is not in the way the program did shuffle all these symlinks. Yes, that leaves something to be desired. The robustness is in that the system relies on functions supported by the filesystem and was thus advertised as being more easily applied to a wider range of games and doesn't require third party programs (or the game exe for that matter) to run through the mod manager.

Balx2 wrote: If you barely speak English, please refrain from posting in it and instead post in what ever language is your native language.
Food for thought: 1) Others probably know your language, you are not alone on this planet in speaking it. 2) Google translate is easier to understand then your written English.
#2 is not a good thing.

NMM, probably was created just to dzaia&lstrok;a&lstrok;, in a simple way, and yes, MO, is for more advanced users, which are looking for a hole in the whole, NMM perfectly fulfills its purpose, the speed also depends on the system, I i7 8x4.4GhZ , standard, and SSD for NMM, and 2 GB mods installed approximately 20.30 seconds, depending on the amount of compressed folders and subfolders, so NMM is fast enough tool :) (sorry translators goggles)

[Biohazard186]

In response to post #43213960. #43215115, #43215850 are all replies on the same post.

darthbdaman wrote: We'll see how this turns out I guess. This makes me very uncomfortable

NMM has never been a particularly stable or powerful mod manager, and has only gotten worse with new features added to ape MO. It is slow, crashes a lot, and just does a worse job than MO at basicallly everything. If MO supported more games, I wouldn't even have NMM installed. If I do have to use an older manager, I use FOMM or OBMM, as they are more functional at this point. I don't mean to harangue anyone, and it is far better than anything I could write, but it simply withers in comparison to the alternatives.

MO, on the other hand, is an amazing piece of software that I couldn't live without anymore, and it will be a shame to see it die. Hopefully this new NMM (NNMM?) will draw far more heavily from MO than old NMM. MO is simply a sleaker, faster, and far more stable piece of software that I actually enjoy using (unlike NMM).

I'll try to remain hopeful, but I have some serious doubts about this decision. It will depend heavily upon the inspiration taken for the final product.

silencer711 wrote: It depends wholesomely on what you make[NMM] it do. For some of us, we install mods in a specific order, from a personally curated list and don't mess with it from that point because our end goal has been achieved.

I have no experience with MO, I'd love to try it but currently I have a stable, organized 122 mod install with NMM 62.1

Credit is due however, to the albeit aging NMM, as it is an ORIGINAL piece of software that sort of came first from where others have built upon it or based their own managers upon its features and abilities.
Not speaking for Tannin42, but if I was going to create a mod manager from scratch I would look to others as a template, write my own code to do the same and just add features from everyone else's mod managers to make mine the ultimate one lol. You gotta start somewhere.

-Keep in mind: If the author of your favorite mod manager is now head of NMM development, you can expect the new NMM to present all the best things about NMM and all the best things from MO... no need to have serious doubts here. :)

darthbdaman wrote: We'll see. MO is an invaluable tool as an author and a user. Having it regress towards an NMM feature set isn't exactly ideal from my position. It could turn out fine, but I will reserve judgement

Considering the developer of MO is the lead developer of the new NMM I wouldn't worry one bit. Lead developers are generally in charge of the actual development process and philosophy. I expect we'll see a "best of both worlds" outcome with the new NMM.

[Charmareian]

In response to post #43216595.

Magickingdom wrote: I just want a simple powerful mod installer/uninstaller. Profiles smofiles, don't need don't want. Just install it right and uninstall it clean. Keep it simple. If it works, don't fix it. I dislike both current mod managers strongly. Constantly both caused me grief. So, I use an ancient version of nmm for skyrim and manual install for FO4. The virtual stuff is virtual trouble. I do hope keep it simple options will be available in the new version. Yeah, I'm an older guy and I hate it when some new thing comes along and rocks my boat. :P Oh, one more thing, make the text big enough so I can read it.
Anyway, smooth sailing to you in the next year. :)

"I just want a simple powerful mod installer/uninstaller. Profiles smofiles, don't need don't want. Just install it right and uninstall it clean. Keep it simple"

How does this not describe Mod Organizer? That would be my exact description of it XD. My only issue I've ever had was getting my archives to invalidate, which MO has a switch to do it automatically, yet another feature. Edited October 13, 2016 by Charmareian

[renthal311]

In response to post #43213860. #43214125, #43214650, #43216125, #43216490, #43216630, #43216760 are all replies on the same post.

renthal311 wrote: one thing I do not like the NMM that creates a 'virtual installation folder mods', it looks like this: install for Skyrim 50 mods, weighing 12GB, NMM creates additional 12GB unnecessary ballast on my hard, cleanrooms think: if I mods already installed and placed files in Skyrim, what I 12GB redundant copies? ? It is a bad solution, the only thing I noticed, I love NMM :D , REN

Gruftlord wrote: It's not actually taking up twice the space, that is a display error in windows explorer. I hope they stay with this technique of 'virtualization', because it sounded way more robust than MO's (actual) virtualization.

Thallassa wrote: After actually testing a few months ago, NMM is not robust >_< That is, it lets you run things directly on the skyrim folder instead of launching through NMM, but that's the only advantage. Things made by executables still aren't managed (they are in MO), NMM still needs to "remember" things (MO and Bash both just compare files in the folders, if a file exists in the mod folder, it's managed, not so for NMM even now), it's overall kind of a mess.

(Also NMM is really slow compared to MO, to be fair I was testing it with very large mods and smaller mods probably there would be no difference).

I hope they keep something more similar to MO's system, but keep it simple. No categories. No buggy as hell compatibility/install order checks. No buggy as hell "archive management." Give us an optional plugin to unpack BSAs right into the mod folder (the way MO does now), but make that option even more difficult to turn on. And for the love of god put every file back in the overwrite, instead of thinking you know where it goes! But keep each mod in its own, totally independent folder, and have *all* file operations be done *on that folder* instead of on the base game folder, so *everything* you do stays managed without having to think about it.

renthal311 wrote: as a mistake? clearly shows 12GB folder, I NMM from the beginning, but once something like that was, and it works well, never mind, I always I remove the files from this folder, Skyrim serves me to learn modding, so very often I do reinstallation, and again and again installs NMM :D

Gruftlord wrote: NMM writes symlinks in the data folder for the files it manages. (win explorer counts the disk space of such files twice). The system is slow with large amounts of files (i.e. when you have a lot of lose files instead of the MUCH preferred BSA) and a slow disk. With BSAs and/or SSDs NMM is very fast (though admittedly, with common stuff like SMIM, that may already not be the case.)

The robustness of NMM's solution is not in the way the program did shuffle all these symlinks. Yes, that leaves something to be desired. The robustness is in that the system relies on functions supported by the filesystem and was thus advertised as being more easily applied to a wider range of games and doesn't require third party programs (or the game exe for that matter) to run through the mod manager.

Balx2 wrote: If you barely speak English, please refrain from posting in it and instead post in what ever language is your native language.
Food for thought: 1) Others probably know your language, you are not alone on this planet in speaking it. 2) Google translate is easier to understand then your written English.
#2 is not a good thing.

renthal311 wrote: NMM, probably was created just to dzaia&lstrok;a&lstrok;, in a simple way, and yes, MO, is for more advanced users, which are looking for a hole in the whole, NMM perfectly fulfills its purpose, the speed also depends on the system, I i7 8x4.4GhZ , standard, and SSD for NMM, and 2 GB mods installed approximately 20.30 seconds, depending on the amount of compressed folders and subfolders, so NMM is fast enough tool :) (sorry translators goggles)

so, why not write more

[Charmareian]

In response to post #43209560. #43209910, #43210605, #43213505, #43215215 are all replies on the same post.

Dreadborn wrote: An update is always (well, most of the times) good news for every program we use BUT do we have to uninstall ALL our mods AGAIN?? Can't we avoid this somehow? It's totally a pain and prevent us from updating NMM and benefit from any new feature.
Thx.

Tannin42 wrote: We are of course aware of this problem. On the other hand we don't want old "baggage" to hold us back.
I can't make any promise yet but we will look into importing from existing NMM and MO installations into the new versions and I will do my best to make updates of the new manager more robust.

JimmyRJump wrote: There must be a way to make the new mod manager get along with, for example, NMM profiles or something along that stretch so that existing NMM profiles can be imported?

Dreadborn wrote: Thank you for your answer and gl with your new task! We all here wish you the best! :)

Pholostan wrote: Importing profiles sounds like the job for a separate conversion tool. Does not need to be a core part of the new Mod Manager IMHO. If the new manager has good documentation, pretty much anyone can take a crack at making a conversion tool.

Who cares if you have to reinstall mods lol. Its fun to build your game from vanilla. I find something new to do every time. My load order consists of maybe 60 mods. If you have more than over 200 mods then you probably don't benefit from all of them. You probably forget you have most of them enabled. Don't waste time making importing Tannin42. That's just more baggage lol. Also not sure if I missed it but did you give this new Mod Manager a name?