UX/UI Designer needed for NMM v2.0

[Ethreon]

In response to post #48320912. #48321102, #48321212 are all replies on the same post.

Deuxis wrote: Why not Open Source? This is a modding site. It is filled to the brim with all kinds of software and graphics designers that have already demonstrated they can get good work done just for the sake of it and not profit. Actually, all the repercussions of this being a job are probably what's turning the right people off.

Ethreon wrote: I'm gonna take a random guess here and assume it is because they want it to be a cohesively developed project, made by a handful of people specially designed and dedicated to this project, not a bunch of randos with no obligation that will make it grow in a lot of random directions with no clue where it's going, abandoning the work mid way.

Just a guess.

Deuxis wrote: Riiiiiight, kind of like they did with Mod Organizer, the currently best mod manager Nexus is trying to compete with?

Best is arguable. Regardless, seems to me like the best way to go about it. Once done they will make all stuff public and you can stop complaining. Just like old mod manager was and still is.

[Tannin42]

In response to post #48320912. #48321102, #48321212, #48321517 are all replies on the same post.

Deuxis wrote: Why not Open Source? This is a modding site. It is filled to the brim with all kinds of software and graphics designers that have already demonstrated they can get good work done just for the sake of it and not profit. Actually, all the repercussions of this being a job are probably what's turning the right people off.

Ethreon wrote: I'm gonna take a random guess here and assume it is because they want it to be a cohesively developed project, made by a handful of people specially designed and dedicated to this project, not a bunch of randos with no obligation that will make it grow in a lot of random directions with no clue where it's going, abandoning the work mid way.

Just a guess.

Deuxis wrote: Riiiiiight, kind of like they did with Mod Organizer, the currently best mod manager Nexus is trying to compete with?

Ethreon wrote: Best is arguable. Regardless, seems to me like the best way to go about it. Once done they will make all stuff public and you can stop complaining. Just like old mod manager was and still is.

It will be OS once we start releasing. But you have to realise that when we publish a "NMM2" it will get a lot of attention, be downloaded hundreds of thousands of times, some users will immediately use it to install 300 mods and expect those installations to continue to work in future versions (even if we say "this is an alpha, don't use productively" )

For development this means:
a) We (likely) get tons of bug reports and spend a lot of time investigating them instead of developing features or UI or anything. Many of these bugs could be found and fixed quicker if we had discovered under controlled conditions.
b) Existing installations for users means we can't just change internal data structures anymore, we have to provide a migration path every time. This is a lot of extra work (meaning: time we're not spending developting features or fixing bugs) and potential for new errors.
c) People will start writing tutorials or creating videos on how to use it - meaning every change we do to the ui after that invalidates work that others have done and worse: These videos stay in existence and will be found by users who are then confused over why it doesn't work as described.
d) Authors may actually decide to work on extensions/plugins to the new manager which again means: Anything we change to the api then may break the work of others, discourage future contributions and so on.

This is why I wouldn't want an alpha of "NMM2" public. It's not the same situation as with MO.
a) MO was not open source for its first ~2 years of development too.
b) In the beginning MO had only a handful of users: friends of mine, then the occasional Nexus user MO had been in the hands of a few "early adopters" for at least a year before the user count even reached a hundred giving me plenty of time to work out the most obvious issues.

Such a slow start wouldn't happen for NMM2 so we have to plan differently.
I would love to show off where we are and what we're planning and getting more input from the community but I'm convinced it wouldn't turn out well if we did that now. Edited March 12, 2017 by Tannin42

[Mikanoshi]

In response to post #48196397. #48199432, #48207232, #48209512, #48213187, #48213752, #48223992, #48229607, #48234192, #48234862, #48235027, #48258657, #48261602, #48284482, #48287072, #48288767, #48290417, #48318322, #48320032, #48320077 are all replies on the same post.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: Mod Organizer UI is very intuitive for me. But maybe thats because i discovered the APP via gophers tutorial for it. My friend seemed to learn modding with it pretty quickly though, much faster than he would with NMM as the mistakes he made didnt require him to reinstall his entire game, and he didn't have to start from scratch with the mods either (thanks to MO)

lued123 wrote: The hardest part of MO's UI is just getting used to the concept of changing your mods' installation order... without installing them in that order. Beyond that, you can use it just as simply as you would NMM.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: Its not a hard concept to get used to. In fact i think having to WORRY about which order to install in every time is a gigantic downside to managers that arent MO and i think i wouldnt even be modding if i had to deal with that gigantic crappy hassle every time, that is an archaic and annoying step in modding that needs to just go away (thankfully due to MO its gone but for some godforsaken reason people still cling on to outdated programs, especially for Oblivion which MO works perfectly fine in and better than other managers but people treat it like voodoo in the OB mod community, because of seemingly non-existant issues that nobody is ever able to explain what they are, even),

especially the tangled crashy un-fixable ruined mess of files you get once mods start overwriting files and you want to uninstall something who's files have already been overwritten. Its pretty simple to see the message that files are being overwritten with the little lightningbolt, and to see priority numbers and realize you can click and drag them up and down as you wish. That feature is amazing and i would never mod without it.

I stick by my opinion that MO is far more user friendly than NMM and ive seen it firsthand how quickly someone can catch on to MO. Installation order is just one more thing that can be severely screwed up, and always WILL be screwed up by new mod users, which doesn't matter with MO.

ThatDirtyShisno wrote: I totally agree @YngvieMalmsteen

Pabulum wrote: Wrye Bash does what it does... in a different way.

One problem I have with Mod Organizer is how it manages mods. I tried to use it, but almost always lost track of my mods and which files are which. I also couldn't get the Creation Kit to work properly with Papyrus (which I need). I also don't like my mods in their own little folders. It makes things a pain to manage in my mind.

I tried using Mod Organizer with Oblivion and none of my mods actually worked. They didn't appear in-game and most mods made for Oblivion are built only for Oblivion Mod Manager (yes I'm pretty sure I ran it through Mod Organizer).

The last issue is the people that use it. The Skyrim Mods subreddit really pulled me from the tool after seeing how many people who take the time to make posts because they needed help with Nexus Mod Manager, but anyone who posted said "f*ck nmm use mo it works for everything". The people that use it (the vocal minority at least) seem to worship the damn thing. It's just a modding tool, not your spouse.

You also have a very isolated enviroment. Want to run DynDOLOD? Do this, hit this check, click this button, run TexGen, click this, do this, etcetera.

Yeah, sorry about this post. I felt like some input was needed.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: You definitely did something wrong, because Mod Organizer has worked perfectly for me with all oblivion mods from the start, and im running 190 active esp's stable, with re-textures, and many OBSE plugins. Installing mods with Oblivion Mod Manager works perfectly within MO, and so does dyndolod, tes4lodgen, construction kit extender obse, etc. You just have to read the steps. You set it up once, and its done.

BTW i never actually used wrye bash to install mods because its interface is like windows 95 and i couldn't figure out how to do anything at all in that program, other than do a bashed patch and run some save file fixes. How is it actually as full featured as MO and how does it do it without seperating the mods into seperate folders?? That seems to be the entire thing, because its impossible to keep track of the history of file overwrites without using insanely ridic amounts of HD space and file transfer times. Also MO has a plethora of mod sorting and categorizing features, you just have to make use of them.

lued123 wrote: Jeez. Lot to respond to here. Sorry for the wall of text.
First, yes, I agree that having to remember overwrites if you want the same level of control in NMM is more arcane than wrapping your head around adjusting installation order in post. It's just that NMM doesn't tell you that, and lets load order determine how your bsa files interact with each other, and loose files overwrite those, which is *usually* sufficient. That's how Skyrim was designed to work, so NMM working that way doesn't have as many problems as you would think.
Second, I do think Mod Organizer's methods are going to be how managers tend to work going into the future. And while Oblivion does tend to interact with OBMM a bit better, MO is perfectly usable for it. You just aren't likely to get support because OBMM has ingrained itself so thoroughly in that community. To them, it doesn't matter which manager is best. Everyone is using OBMM, so why bother supporting anything else?
It can be a bit weird having all your mods in their own folders if you're used to having everything in one place, but you just have to realize that MO is designed so that you never have to look at the actual file structure. MO knows, in advance, what your data folder is going to look like, which is what the data tab is for.
As for the people who use it, I can definitely see your point there. A lot of people are really obnoxious about it. Just don't let the community decide the feature set of your mod manager.
Isolated environment? DynDOLOD installs? I don't see what you mean by that. DynDOLOD's install procedure is basically the same in MO. You just run the exe files through MO instead of through Windows... like everything else.
Oh, and second that question about Wrye Bash. I also only use it for bashed patches, and would also like to know how it compares.

HadToRegister wrote: I've used OBMM, NMM, MO, and Wrye Bash

I didn't like the way MO treated certain files ad made them difficult to work with, mainly Script Extenders.

I also don't care for that OverWrite folder that MO keeps, unintuitive in my book, and this is coming from someone who's had to use the confusing interfaces on Hospital Analyzers.

I like Wrye Bash for its power, and it's Bash Patches

I've currently gotten back into using Wrye Bash because I've been playing Oblivion again, and am probably going to use WryeSmash next time around if I get back into playing Fallout or Skyrim SE

Wrye Bash > OBMM > MO > NMM

lued123 wrote: The overwrite folder is just another way for MO to make sure you don't add any crap to your vanilla files. It's basically only for files that were generated in the data folder while running the game or an external tool. All you need to do is double-click or right-click the overwrite mod in the modlist and:
a. Drag those files into the mods that they came from. For instance, if an skse plugin created a log file, you'd drag that into the plugin's mod folder.
b. Create a new mod specifically for those files. For instance, your DynDOLOD output could be made into its own mod so you could have different DynDOLOD outputs for each profile or something like that.
It is a thing you need to learn, but if you have an understanding of how MO works, it's not unintuitive at all. In fact, it seems necessary in order to keep the data folder pristine.

firehawksh wrote: MO > Wrye Bash > You shouldn't use these

It really isn't that difficult to learn how to use MO, all you really need to do is read a tutorial or watch a video - which you would do to know how to create bashed patches anyway. None of the other mod managers come close with the tools it has, and I say that after having seen all four. Period.

Pabulum wrote:

Also MO has a plethora of mod sorting and categorizing features, you just have to make use of them.

You worship the damn thing, don't you?

Second, I do think Mod Organizer's methods are going to be how managers tend to work going into the future.

I hope not.

t can be a bit weird having all your mods in their own folders if you're used to having everything in one place, but you just have to realize that MO is designed so that you never have to look at the actual file structure. MO knows, in advance, what your data folder is going to look like, which is what the data tab is for.

I used it back in 2015 and had a lot of problems getting to grips with that system a year later.

Isolated environment? DynDOLOD installs? I don't see what you mean by that. DynDOLOD's install procedure is basically the same in MO. You just run the exe files through MO instead of through Windows... like everything else.
Oh, and second that question about Wrye Bash. I also only use it for bashed patches, and would also like to know how it compares.

The isolated environment adds one more step to doing things and can create bugs with the forced x86 nature of it (SkyProc comes to mind). I had DynDOLOD break while running it... and yes, I followed the GamerPoets tutorial exactly.

Wrye Bash has most of what Mod Organizer has minus any kind of full FOMod support, Download with Manager support, BSA management, mod isolation, and profiles (*gasp* Not... not a profile-less mod manager). Mod installation is fairly similar to Mod Organizer but you have to click a button to get the files in the correct place.

The overwrite folder is just another way for MO to make sure you don't add any crap to your vanilla files.

That's the whole point of modding. You put new stuff in the data folder. If you install about 8000 mods per playthrough then you need Mod Organizer. If you are a reasonable person, you don't install 8000 mods (or even a couple hundred) and therefore don't need it.

If you're a control freak, use Mod Organizer.

If you like simplicity, use Nexus Mod Manager.

If you like advanced "Windows 9x" style of a mod manager, use Wrye Bash. I don't want to start a war in a thread where this isn't even on-topic.

lued123 wrote: "Wrye Bash has most of what Mod Organizer has minus any kind of full FOMod support, Download with Manager support, BSA management, mod isolation, and profiles"
Actually, that sounds awful. Those are all of my favorite things about MO.
Also, "If you are a reasonable person, you don't install 8000 mods," was too far.
We *are* getting off-topic though. You're definitely right about that, so let's either steer back toward the subject of UI or just end the thread here.

Ethreon wrote: Why are MO fans so annoying about their manager?

phase.verocity wrote: Mod Organizer helps you stay sane when crashes start to happen as its easy to turn stuff off and on. Nexus is good at making sure things work like they were intended but takes a lot longer to trouble shoot and all the mods need to be physically uninstalled. It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder. Some script extensions will only work in NMM for some reason. If you're using mod organizer you need to physically copy them to the data folder.

What we need is a combination of both organizers that overcomes these limitations. With each mod there should be a choice to install it to the data folder or a virtual folder. It could then keep track of every mod it installed into the data folder which would be rather simple as there aren't many that would need to be physically in it. You could put an option in the setup to only use virtual files or only use physical installation or both which could also be turned off and on in the settings. It would also use less space as the virtual folder would be minimal. Finally it would be awesome if it also had the ability to create bashed patches so we didn't need to run external programs.

Mikanoshi wrote: > takes a lot longer to trouble shoot and all the mods need to be physically uninstalled
Just uncheck esp. Uninstall and reinstall are quick though (see below why) if you want to get rid of meshes/textures/etc too.

> It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder
Yeah... no. Heard about hard links?)

phase.verocity wrote: Nope. haven't discovered the hard links in NMM. I just noticed the folder that says virtual and the second copy of the files in the actual data location. I didn't think the current NMM used hard links.

I thought of another plus for NMM though. It allows you to choose individual files to overwrite in other mods rather that mod organizers way which moves the whole mods folder up or down.

Using NMM I turned all mods off to trouble shoot a fallout 4 crash just two days ago. Even on SSD drives it took a good 10 mins to uninstall the 180 or so mods. I tried turning off the esp first but it didn't pick up the crash mod until I had uninstalled and reinstalled all of the mods. The crash was happening between plenty of exploration and functional displays. If i picked up everything in the exploration rooms it would crash when i left the room until i turned off functional displays.

Mikanoshi wrote: It not only overwrites files of the first mod with the files from the second mod, it also restores overwrited files of a first mod when you uninstall the second one.
I'm certain uninstall/reinstall just creates new hard links, reinstall doesn't even bring up FOMOD installer. You have to select "Uninstall > From all profiles" to remove mod's files, next install will be from mod's archive.

phase.verocity wrote: I've checked out hard links and now they have a nice little red mark on their icons. So i'm pretty sure its using hard links which is good. The down side is that the directory is still dirty as mods leave stuff in the directory.. Mod Organizer handles that with an overwrite folder. Also if I wanted to copy just the fallout 4 folder I wouldn't be able to as the hard links get copied with it. I used to like doing that to clean it with Mod Organizer.

Another issue with NMM when re enabling mods is the constant picking of which files need to overwrite which files. In Mod organizer if a virtual folder was set it was set. It could just be turned off and on without a bunch of do you want to overwrite questions. When trouble shooting it is a lot easier and takes a lot less time if you don't get a bunch of questions about reinstalling.

There is also the issue of changing computers. With mod organizer i can just copy the mod organizer folder over.

Pabulum wrote: If I got somebody pissed off over this, sorry.

Actually, that sounds awful. Those are all of my favorite things about MO.

No FOMod isn't as bad as you think. Same with the download with manager function. It just takes some patience to figure it out and once you get it, it's perfectly fine.

It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_link - Wrye Bash doesn't use Symbolic Links to handle everything. It doesn't work like Nexus Mod Manager. Do not assume that. It takes the files from the archive and extracts them to the data folder.

Just uncheck esp. Uninstall and reinstall are quick though (see below why) if you want to get rid of meshes/textures/etc too.

It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing.

Another issue with NMM when re enabling mods is the constant picking of which files need to overwrite which files.

Have you read the comments? I don't use or like Nexus Mod Manager. Drag, drop, and "anneal". That's Wrye Bash.

I'm certain uninstall/reinstall just creates new hard links, reinstall doesn't even bring up FOMOD installer. You have to select "Uninstall > From all profiles" to remove mod's files, next install will be from mod's archive.

I remember when people actually read responses. READ IT! You will get it then.


End. Do not reply to this.

Ethreon wrote: "It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing."

This happens regardless of the mod manager you use - removing mods mid save is not recommended.

> It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing.

What are you even talking about? What files? Unchecking esp crashes game if it is not able to load some objects from savegame, but there are ways to avoid it.

> I remember when people actually read responses. READ IT! You will get it then.

I was not replying to you. Who are you and what do you want? Edited March 12, 2017 by Mikanoshi

[Deuxis]

In response to post #48320912. #48321102, #48321212, #48321517, #48327667 are all replies on the same post.

Deuxis wrote: Why not Open Source? This is a modding site. It is filled to the brim with all kinds of software and graphics designers that have already demonstrated they can get good work done just for the sake of it and not profit. Actually, all the repercussions of this being a job are probably what's turning the right people off.

Ethreon wrote: I'm gonna take a random guess here and assume it is because they want it to be a cohesively developed project, made by a handful of people specially designed and dedicated to this project, not a bunch of randos with no obligation that will make it grow in a lot of random directions with no clue where it's going, abandoning the work mid way.

Just a guess.

Deuxis wrote: Riiiiiight, kind of like they did with Mod Organizer, the currently best mod manager Nexus is trying to compete with?

Ethreon wrote: Best is arguable. Regardless, seems to me like the best way to go about it. Once done they will make all stuff public and you can stop complaining. Just like old mod manager was and still is.

Tannin42 wrote: It will be OS once we start releasing. But you have to realise that when we publish a "NMM2" it will get a lot of attention, be downloaded hundreds of thousands of times, some users will immediately use it to install 300 mods and expect those installations to continue to work in future versions (even if we say "this is an alpha, don't use productively" )

For development this means:
a) We (likely) get tons of bug reports and spend a lot of time investigating them instead of developing features or UI or anything. Many of these bugs could be found and fixed quicker if we had discovered under controlled conditions.
b) Existing installations for users means we can't just change internal data structures anymore, we have to provide a migration path every time. This is a lot of extra work (meaning: time we're not spending developting features or fixing bugs) and potential for new errors.
c) People will start writing tutorials or creating videos on how to use it - meaning every change we do to the ui after that invalidates work that others have done and worse: These videos stay in existence and will be found by users who are then confused over why it doesn't work as described.
d) Authors may actually decide to work on extensions/plugins to the new manager which again means: Anything we change to the api then may break the work of others, discourage future contributions and so on.

This is why I wouldn't want an alpha of "NMM2" public. It's not the same situation as with MO.
a) MO was not open source for its first ~2 years of development too.
b) In the beginning MO had only a handful of users: friends of mine, then the occasional Nexus user MO had been in the hands of a few "early adopters" for at least a year before the user count even reached a hundred giving me plenty of time to work out the most obvious issues.

Such a slow start wouldn't happen for NMM2 so we have to plan differently.
I would love to show off where we are and what we're planning and getting more input from the community but I'm convinced it wouldn't turn out well if we did that now.

This is a great explanation, thank you.

[lued123]

In response to post #48267087. #48273222, #48274802, #48275682, #48276042, #48276792, #48277667, #48277912, #48278582, #48279167 are all replies on the same post.

Mikanoshi wrote: Please, not Chromium, 100MB++ mod manager? Please, no. Have you seen LOOT? 105 MB only to have Polymer? Similar UI can be done in less than 10MB.

Chromium is the worst for desktop development, it has a structure for a browser, multiprocess with IPC and all those callbacks... Can you just use a solution that was created with desktop programs in mind? I can suggest Sciter (https://sciter.com/), you can create any interface you like with it (HTML, CSS, TIScript) and it's designed to closely interact with native code. Yes, TIScript is based on JavaScript, but is different and not compatible with any JS frameworks, but you really don't need any of those frameworks to make an UI like in NMM.

Kayomn wrote: Yeah, I'm still not sure what I think about it either. Personally I think there are a lot of great native system frameworks they're neglecting, but they seem pretty sure they've made the right call.

If it ends up being a colossal failure there will always be alternatives that will rise from the demand, so I'm hardly putting all my eggs in the NMM2 basket.

Also I think this whole themeing thing is personally dumb. From a design perspective a consistent system UI is ideally what you should be going for and I get the reason it's probably being marketed as a feature is because Electron, as of right now, cannot adapt to the system theme.

Mikanoshi wrote: Maybe not a failure, but a 100MB+ program that will consume 200-300MB of memory and will create multiple processes while running. Totally unnecessary for program like this.
Theming is ok, I would like to have minimalistic UI and color that matches my OS. Theming is also easy to do if everything was done in CSS.

kryptodragon13 wrote: agreed i have 4GB of sdRAM but some people still dont have that when only wanting to play like elder scrolls OBLIVION you know :/ and i like the stock and light XML languages cuz i always see javascript being misused too much for anoying ads. i could just be inexperienced and off sobject cuz im still new here but all i notice is that javascript ads arent alwys the answer so if there goina make this some kinda marketing thing they should still use less invading html banners or whatever instead. cuz thats true simplicity on both ends.

Kayomn wrote: QT has some pretty good themeing capabilities, and it's cross-platform. I think their logic with using Electron is that it's easy to maintain and that resource management isn't all that important, which is great for throwaway software but not so good for software that's assumed to be around for years to come.

Electron is not going to get any lighter, and any extensions or libraries are only going to make it heavier. Not saying they should build NMM2 in assembly in Nano but on the same chord they should ideally be optimizing.

Ethreon wrote: You guys realize there is a dedicated NMM features and discussion post and should stop hijacking this thread, right?

Kayomn wrote: Nah I didn't. Never use the forum, I've been responding via the news post. If there's a rule against this I'll be happy to move over to the thread you mentioned.

Ethreon wrote: here

Mikanoshi wrote: @Kayomn
You even posted in that thread))

Kayomn wrote: Mikanoshi it's due to how the forum and the news comments are linked. Everytime I post in the news it creates a post in the forum in the connected thread.

Someone asked about memory usage on a previous news post and Tannin said something like this: We're pretty confident that we've made the best choice(s) and Windows' scheduler should prioritize the game way over the manager anyway.
http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/news/13135/?
Just scroll down a bit to Kayomn's post and Tannin's reply. Edited March 14, 2017 by lued123

[PhaseVerocity]

In response to post #48196397. #48199432, #48207232, #48209512, #48213187, #48213752, #48223992, #48229607, #48234192, #48234862, #48235027, #48258657, #48261602, #48284482, #48287072, #48288767, #48290417, #48318322, #48320032, #48320077, #48331907 are all replies on the same post.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: Mod Organizer UI is very intuitive for me. But maybe thats because i discovered the APP via gophers tutorial for it. My friend seemed to learn modding with it pretty quickly though, much faster than he would with NMM as the mistakes he made didnt require him to reinstall his entire game, and he didn't have to start from scratch with the mods either (thanks to MO)

lued123 wrote: The hardest part of MO's UI is just getting used to the concept of changing your mods' installation order... without installing them in that order. Beyond that, you can use it just as simply as you would NMM.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: Its not a hard concept to get used to. In fact i think having to WORRY about which order to install in every time is a gigantic downside to managers that arent MO and i think i wouldnt even be modding if i had to deal with that gigantic crappy hassle every time, that is an archaic and annoying step in modding that needs to just go away (thankfully due to MO its gone but for some godforsaken reason people still cling on to outdated programs, especially for Oblivion which MO works perfectly fine in and better than other managers but people treat it like voodoo in the OB mod community, because of seemingly non-existant issues that nobody is ever able to explain what they are, even),

especially the tangled crashy un-fixable ruined mess of files you get once mods start overwriting files and you want to uninstall something who's files have already been overwritten. Its pretty simple to see the message that files are being overwritten with the little lightningbolt, and to see priority numbers and realize you can click and drag them up and down as you wish. That feature is amazing and i would never mod without it.

I stick by my opinion that MO is far more user friendly than NMM and ive seen it firsthand how quickly someone can catch on to MO. Installation order is just one more thing that can be severely screwed up, and always WILL be screwed up by new mod users, which doesn't matter with MO.

ThatDirtyShisno wrote: I totally agree @YngvieMalmsteen

Pabulum wrote: Wrye Bash does what it does... in a different way.

One problem I have with Mod Organizer is how it manages mods. I tried to use it, but almost always lost track of my mods and which files are which. I also couldn't get the Creation Kit to work properly with Papyrus (which I need). I also don't like my mods in their own little folders. It makes things a pain to manage in my mind.

I tried using Mod Organizer with Oblivion and none of my mods actually worked. They didn't appear in-game and most mods made for Oblivion are built only for Oblivion Mod Manager (yes I'm pretty sure I ran it through Mod Organizer).

The last issue is the people that use it. The Skyrim Mods subreddit really pulled me from the tool after seeing how many people who take the time to make posts because they needed help with Nexus Mod Manager, but anyone who posted said "f*ck nmm use mo it works for everything". The people that use it (the vocal minority at least) seem to worship the damn thing. It's just a modding tool, not your spouse.

You also have a very isolated enviroment. Want to run DynDOLOD? Do this, hit this check, click this button, run TexGen, click this, do this, etcetera.

Yeah, sorry about this post. I felt like some input was needed.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: You definitely did something wrong, because Mod Organizer has worked perfectly for me with all oblivion mods from the start, and im running 190 active esp's stable, with re-textures, and many OBSE plugins. Installing mods with Oblivion Mod Manager works perfectly within MO, and so does dyndolod, tes4lodgen, construction kit extender obse, etc. You just have to read the steps. You set it up once, and its done.

BTW i never actually used wrye bash to install mods because its interface is like windows 95 and i couldn't figure out how to do anything at all in that program, other than do a bashed patch and run some save file fixes. How is it actually as full featured as MO and how does it do it without seperating the mods into seperate folders?? That seems to be the entire thing, because its impossible to keep track of the history of file overwrites without using insanely ridic amounts of HD space and file transfer times. Also MO has a plethora of mod sorting and categorizing features, you just have to make use of them.

lued123 wrote: Jeez. Lot to respond to here. Sorry for the wall of text.
First, yes, I agree that having to remember overwrites if you want the same level of control in NMM is more arcane than wrapping your head around adjusting installation order in post. It's just that NMM doesn't tell you that, and lets load order determine how your bsa files interact with each other, and loose files overwrite those, which is *usually* sufficient. That's how Skyrim was designed to work, so NMM working that way doesn't have as many problems as you would think.
Second, I do think Mod Organizer's methods are going to be how managers tend to work going into the future. And while Oblivion does tend to interact with OBMM a bit better, MO is perfectly usable for it. You just aren't likely to get support because OBMM has ingrained itself so thoroughly in that community. To them, it doesn't matter which manager is best. Everyone is using OBMM, so why bother supporting anything else?
It can be a bit weird having all your mods in their own folders if you're used to having everything in one place, but you just have to realize that MO is designed so that you never have to look at the actual file structure. MO knows, in advance, what your data folder is going to look like, which is what the data tab is for.
As for the people who use it, I can definitely see your point there. A lot of people are really obnoxious about it. Just don't let the community decide the feature set of your mod manager.
Isolated environment? DynDOLOD installs? I don't see what you mean by that. DynDOLOD's install procedure is basically the same in MO. You just run the exe files through MO instead of through Windows... like everything else.
Oh, and second that question about Wrye Bash. I also only use it for bashed patches, and would also like to know how it compares.

HadToRegister wrote: I've used OBMM, NMM, MO, and Wrye Bash

I didn't like the way MO treated certain files ad made them difficult to work with, mainly Script Extenders.

I also don't care for that OverWrite folder that MO keeps, unintuitive in my book, and this is coming from someone who's had to use the confusing interfaces on Hospital Analyzers.

I like Wrye Bash for its power, and it's Bash Patches

I've currently gotten back into using Wrye Bash because I've been playing Oblivion again, and am probably going to use WryeSmash next time around if I get back into playing Fallout or Skyrim SE

Wrye Bash > OBMM > MO > NMM

lued123 wrote: The overwrite folder is just another way for MO to make sure you don't add any crap to your vanilla files. It's basically only for files that were generated in the data folder while running the game or an external tool. All you need to do is double-click or right-click the overwrite mod in the modlist and:
a. Drag those files into the mods that they came from. For instance, if an skse plugin created a log file, you'd drag that into the plugin's mod folder.
b. Create a new mod specifically for those files. For instance, your DynDOLOD output could be made into its own mod so you could have different DynDOLOD outputs for each profile or something like that.
It is a thing you need to learn, but if you have an understanding of how MO works, it's not unintuitive at all. In fact, it seems necessary in order to keep the data folder pristine.

firehawksh wrote: MO > Wrye Bash > You shouldn't use these

It really isn't that difficult to learn how to use MO, all you really need to do is read a tutorial or watch a video - which you would do to know how to create bashed patches anyway. None of the other mod managers come close with the tools it has, and I say that after having seen all four. Period.

Pabulum wrote:

Also MO has a plethora of mod sorting and categorizing features, you just have to make use of them.

You worship the damn thing, don't you?

Second, I do think Mod Organizer's methods are going to be how managers tend to work going into the future.

I hope not.

t can be a bit weird having all your mods in their own folders if you're used to having everything in one place, but you just have to realize that MO is designed so that you never have to look at the actual file structure. MO knows, in advance, what your data folder is going to look like, which is what the data tab is for.

I used it back in 2015 and had a lot of problems getting to grips with that system a year later.

Isolated environment? DynDOLOD installs? I don't see what you mean by that. DynDOLOD's install procedure is basically the same in MO. You just run the exe files through MO instead of through Windows... like everything else.
Oh, and second that question about Wrye Bash. I also only use it for bashed patches, and would also like to know how it compares.

The isolated environment adds one more step to doing things and can create bugs with the forced x86 nature of it (SkyProc comes to mind). I had DynDOLOD break while running it... and yes, I followed the GamerPoets tutorial exactly.

Wrye Bash has most of what Mod Organizer has minus any kind of full FOMod support, Download with Manager support, BSA management, mod isolation, and profiles (*gasp* Not... not a profile-less mod manager). Mod installation is fairly similar to Mod Organizer but you have to click a button to get the files in the correct place.

The overwrite folder is just another way for MO to make sure you don't add any crap to your vanilla files.

That's the whole point of modding. You put new stuff in the data folder. If you install about 8000 mods per playthrough then you need Mod Organizer. If you are a reasonable person, you don't install 8000 mods (or even a couple hundred) and therefore don't need it.

If you're a control freak, use Mod Organizer.

If you like simplicity, use Nexus Mod Manager.

If you like advanced "Windows 9x" style of a mod manager, use Wrye Bash. I don't want to start a war in a thread where this isn't even on-topic.

lued123 wrote: "Wrye Bash has most of what Mod Organizer has minus any kind of full FOMod support, Download with Manager support, BSA management, mod isolation, and profiles"
Actually, that sounds awful. Those are all of my favorite things about MO.
Also, "If you are a reasonable person, you don't install 8000 mods," was too far.
We *are* getting off-topic though. You're definitely right about that, so let's either steer back toward the subject of UI or just end the thread here.

Ethreon wrote: Why are MO fans so annoying about their manager?

phase.verocity wrote: Mod Organizer helps you stay sane when crashes start to happen as its easy to turn stuff off and on. Nexus is good at making sure things work like they were intended but takes a lot longer to trouble shoot and all the mods need to be physically uninstalled. It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder. Some script extensions will only work in NMM for some reason. If you're using mod organizer you need to physically copy them to the data folder.

What we need is a combination of both organizers that overcomes these limitations. With each mod there should be a choice to install it to the data folder or a virtual folder. It could then keep track of every mod it installed into the data folder which would be rather simple as there aren't many that would need to be physically in it. You could put an option in the setup to only use virtual files or only use physical installation or both which could also be turned off and on in the settings. It would also use less space as the virtual folder would be minimal. Finally it would be awesome if it also had the ability to create bashed patches so we didn't need to run external programs.

Mikanoshi wrote: > takes a lot longer to trouble shoot and all the mods need to be physically uninstalled
Just uncheck esp. Uninstall and reinstall are quick though (see below why) if you want to get rid of meshes/textures/etc too.

> It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder
Yeah... no. Heard about hard links?)

phase.verocity wrote: Nope. haven't discovered the hard links in NMM. I just noticed the folder that says virtual and the second copy of the files in the actual data location. I didn't think the current NMM used hard links.

I thought of another plus for NMM though. It allows you to choose individual files to overwrite in other mods rather that mod organizers way which moves the whole mods folder up or down.

Using NMM I turned all mods off to trouble shoot a fallout 4 crash just two days ago. Even on SSD drives it took a good 10 mins to uninstall the 180 or so mods. I tried turning off the esp first but it didn't pick up the crash mod until I had uninstalled and reinstalled all of the mods. The crash was happening between plenty of exploration and functional displays. If i picked up everything in the exploration rooms it would crash when i left the room until i turned off functional displays.

Mikanoshi wrote: It not only overwrites files of the first mod with the files from the second mod, it also restores overwrited files of a first mod when you uninstall the second one.
I'm certain uninstall/reinstall just creates new hard links, reinstall doesn't even bring up FOMOD installer. You have to select "Uninstall > From all profiles" to remove mod's files, next install will be from mod's archive.

phase.verocity wrote: I've checked out hard links and now they have a nice little red mark on their icons. So i'm pretty sure its using hard links which is good. The down side is that the directory is still dirty as mods leave stuff in the directory.. Mod Organizer handles that with an overwrite folder. Also if I wanted to copy just the fallout 4 folder I wouldn't be able to as the hard links get copied with it. I used to like doing that to clean it with Mod Organizer.

Another issue with NMM when re enabling mods is the constant picking of which files need to overwrite which files. In Mod organizer if a virtual folder was set it was set. It could just be turned off and on without a bunch of do you want to overwrite questions. When trouble shooting it is a lot easier and takes a lot less time if you don't get a bunch of questions about reinstalling.

There is also the issue of changing computers. With mod organizer i can just copy the mod organizer folder over.

Pabulum wrote: If I got somebody pissed off over this, sorry.

Actually, that sounds awful. Those are all of my favorite things about MO.

No FOMod isn't as bad as you think. Same with the download with manager function. It just takes some patience to figure it out and once you get it, it's perfectly fine.

It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_link - Wrye Bash doesn't use Symbolic Links to handle everything. It doesn't work like Nexus Mod Manager. Do not assume that. It takes the files from the archive and extracts them to the data folder.

Just uncheck esp. Uninstall and reinstall are quick though (see below why) if you want to get rid of meshes/textures/etc too.

It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing.

Another issue with NMM when re enabling mods is the constant picking of which files need to overwrite which files.

Have you read the comments? I don't use or like Nexus Mod Manager. Drag, drop, and "anneal". That's Wrye Bash.

I'm certain uninstall/reinstall just creates new hard links, reinstall doesn't even bring up FOMOD installer. You have to select "Uninstall > From all profiles" to remove mod's files, next install will be from mod's archive.

I remember when people actually read responses. READ IT! You will get it then.


End. Do not reply to this.

Ethreon wrote: "It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing."

This happens regardless of the mod manager you use - removing mods mid save is not recommended.

Mikanoshi wrote: > It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing.

What are you even talking about? What files? Unchecking esp crashes game if it is not able to load some objects from savegame, but there are ways to avoid it.

> I remember when people actually read responses. READ IT! You will get it then.

I was not replying to you. Who are you and what do you want?

Lol. funny funny. You know mod organizer makes chocolate popcorn but NMM only makes strawberry popcorn. Wyrebash just has plain popcorn. Why can't we have a mixed bag of popcorn? I suppose the biggest turn off of Mod organizer for me with fallout 4 is that I can't get it working due to some permission bugs. Wyre bash on the other hand doesn't recognize any of the pre skyrim mods that i loaded into the game and in any case its not a troubleshooting tool for meshes and textures. Actually the only thing i use wyre bash for is making a bashed patch and sometimes to see if i'm missing a master file.

[vimebox]

In response to post #48196397. #48199432, #48207232, #48209512, #48213187, #48213752, #48223992, #48229607, #48234192, #48234862, #48235027, #48258657, #48261602, #48284482, #48287072, #48288767, #48290417, #48318322, #48320032, #48320077, #48331907, #48497322 are all replies on the same post.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: Mod Organizer UI is very intuitive for me. But maybe thats because i discovered the APP via gophers tutorial for it. My friend seemed to learn modding with it pretty quickly though, much faster than he would with NMM as the mistakes he made didnt require him to reinstall his entire game, and he didn't have to start from scratch with the mods either (thanks to MO)

lued123 wrote: The hardest part of MO's UI is just getting used to the concept of changing your mods' installation order... without installing them in that order. Beyond that, you can use it just as simply as you would NMM.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: Its not a hard concept to get used to. In fact i think having to WORRY about which order to install in every time is a gigantic downside to managers that arent MO and i think i wouldnt even be modding if i had to deal with that gigantic crappy hassle every time, that is an archaic and annoying step in modding that needs to just go away (thankfully due to MO its gone but for some godforsaken reason people still cling on to outdated programs, especially for Oblivion which MO works perfectly fine in and better than other managers but people treat it like voodoo in the OB mod community, because of seemingly non-existant issues that nobody is ever able to explain what they are, even),

especially the tangled crashy un-fixable ruined mess of files you get once mods start overwriting files and you want to uninstall something who's files have already been overwritten. Its pretty simple to see the message that files are being overwritten with the little lightningbolt, and to see priority numbers and realize you can click and drag them up and down as you wish. That feature is amazing and i would never mod without it.

I stick by my opinion that MO is far more user friendly than NMM and ive seen it firsthand how quickly someone can catch on to MO. Installation order is just one more thing that can be severely screwed up, and always WILL be screwed up by new mod users, which doesn't matter with MO.

ThatDirtyShisno wrote: I totally agree @YngvieMalmsteen

Pabulum wrote: Wrye Bash does what it does... in a different way.

One problem I have with Mod Organizer is how it manages mods. I tried to use it, but almost always lost track of my mods and which files are which. I also couldn't get the Creation Kit to work properly with Papyrus (which I need). I also don't like my mods in their own little folders. It makes things a pain to manage in my mind.

I tried using Mod Organizer with Oblivion and none of my mods actually worked. They didn't appear in-game and most mods made for Oblivion are built only for Oblivion Mod Manager (yes I'm pretty sure I ran it through Mod Organizer).

The last issue is the people that use it. The Skyrim Mods subreddit really pulled me from the tool after seeing how many people who take the time to make posts because they needed help with Nexus Mod Manager, but anyone who posted said "f*ck nmm use mo it works for everything". The people that use it (the vocal minority at least) seem to worship the damn thing. It's just a modding tool, not your spouse.

You also have a very isolated enviroment. Want to run DynDOLOD? Do this, hit this check, click this button, run TexGen, click this, do this, etcetera.

Yeah, sorry about this post. I felt like some input was needed.

YngvieMalmsteen wrote: You definitely did something wrong, because Mod Organizer has worked perfectly for me with all oblivion mods from the start, and im running 190 active esp's stable, with re-textures, and many OBSE plugins. Installing mods with Oblivion Mod Manager works perfectly within MO, and so does dyndolod, tes4lodgen, construction kit extender obse, etc. You just have to read the steps. You set it up once, and its done.

BTW i never actually used wrye bash to install mods because its interface is like windows 95 and i couldn't figure out how to do anything at all in that program, other than do a bashed patch and run some save file fixes. How is it actually as full featured as MO and how does it do it without seperating the mods into seperate folders?? That seems to be the entire thing, because its impossible to keep track of the history of file overwrites without using insanely ridic amounts of HD space and file transfer times. Also MO has a plethora of mod sorting and categorizing features, you just have to make use of them.

lued123 wrote: Jeez. Lot to respond to here. Sorry for the wall of text.
First, yes, I agree that having to remember overwrites if you want the same level of control in NMM is more arcane than wrapping your head around adjusting installation order in post. It's just that NMM doesn't tell you that, and lets load order determine how your bsa files interact with each other, and loose files overwrite those, which is *usually* sufficient. That's how Skyrim was designed to work, so NMM working that way doesn't have as many problems as you would think.
Second, I do think Mod Organizer's methods are going to be how managers tend to work going into the future. And while Oblivion does tend to interact with OBMM a bit better, MO is perfectly usable for it. You just aren't likely to get support because OBMM has ingrained itself so thoroughly in that community. To them, it doesn't matter which manager is best. Everyone is using OBMM, so why bother supporting anything else?
It can be a bit weird having all your mods in their own folders if you're used to having everything in one place, but you just have to realize that MO is designed so that you never have to look at the actual file structure. MO knows, in advance, what your data folder is going to look like, which is what the data tab is for.
As for the people who use it, I can definitely see your point there. A lot of people are really obnoxious about it. Just don't let the community decide the feature set of your mod manager.
Isolated environment? DynDOLOD installs? I don't see what you mean by that. DynDOLOD's install procedure is basically the same in MO. You just run the exe files through MO instead of through Windows... like everything else.
Oh, and second that question about Wrye Bash. I also only use it for bashed patches, and would also like to know how it compares.

HadToRegister wrote: I've used OBMM, NMM, MO, and Wrye Bash

I didn't like the way MO treated certain files ad made them difficult to work with, mainly Script Extenders.

I also don't care for that OverWrite folder that MO keeps, unintuitive in my book, and this is coming from someone who's had to use the confusing interfaces on Hospital Analyzers.

I like Wrye Bash for its power, and it's Bash Patches

I've currently gotten back into using Wrye Bash because I've been playing Oblivion again, and am probably going to use WryeSmash next time around if I get back into playing Fallout or Skyrim SE

Wrye Bash > OBMM > MO > NMM

lued123 wrote: The overwrite folder is just another way for MO to make sure you don't add any crap to your vanilla files. It's basically only for files that were generated in the data folder while running the game or an external tool. All you need to do is double-click or right-click the overwrite mod in the modlist and:
a. Drag those files into the mods that they came from. For instance, if an skse plugin created a log file, you'd drag that into the plugin's mod folder.
b. Create a new mod specifically for those files. For instance, your DynDOLOD output could be made into its own mod so you could have different DynDOLOD outputs for each profile or something like that.
It is a thing you need to learn, but if you have an understanding of how MO works, it's not unintuitive at all. In fact, it seems necessary in order to keep the data folder pristine.

firehawksh wrote: MO > Wrye Bash > You shouldn't use these

It really isn't that difficult to learn how to use MO, all you really need to do is read a tutorial or watch a video - which you would do to know how to create bashed patches anyway. None of the other mod managers come close with the tools it has, and I say that after having seen all four. Period.

Pabulum wrote:

Also MO has a plethora of mod sorting and categorizing features, you just have to make use of them.

You worship the damn thing, don't you?

Second, I do think Mod Organizer's methods are going to be how managers tend to work going into the future.

I hope not.

t can be a bit weird having all your mods in their own folders if you're used to having everything in one place, but you just have to realize that MO is designed so that you never have to look at the actual file structure. MO knows, in advance, what your data folder is going to look like, which is what the data tab is for.

I used it back in 2015 and had a lot of problems getting to grips with that system a year later.

Isolated environment? DynDOLOD installs? I don't see what you mean by that. DynDOLOD's install procedure is basically the same in MO. You just run the exe files through MO instead of through Windows... like everything else.
Oh, and second that question about Wrye Bash. I also only use it for bashed patches, and would also like to know how it compares.

The isolated environment adds one more step to doing things and can create bugs with the forced x86 nature of it (SkyProc comes to mind). I had DynDOLOD break while running it... and yes, I followed the GamerPoets tutorial exactly.

Wrye Bash has most of what Mod Organizer has minus any kind of full FOMod support, Download with Manager support, BSA management, mod isolation, and profiles (*gasp* Not... not a profile-less mod manager). Mod installation is fairly similar to Mod Organizer but you have to click a button to get the files in the correct place.

The overwrite folder is just another way for MO to make sure you don't add any crap to your vanilla files.

That's the whole point of modding. You put new stuff in the data folder. If you install about 8000 mods per playthrough then you need Mod Organizer. If you are a reasonable person, you don't install 8000 mods (or even a couple hundred) and therefore don't need it.

If you're a control freak, use Mod Organizer.

If you like simplicity, use Nexus Mod Manager.

If you like advanced "Windows 9x" style of a mod manager, use Wrye Bash. I don't want to start a war in a thread where this isn't even on-topic.

lued123 wrote: "Wrye Bash has most of what Mod Organizer has minus any kind of full FOMod support, Download with Manager support, BSA management, mod isolation, and profiles"
Actually, that sounds awful. Those are all of my favorite things about MO.
Also, "If you are a reasonable person, you don't install 8000 mods," was too far.
We *are* getting off-topic though. You're definitely right about that, so let's either steer back toward the subject of UI or just end the thread here.

Ethreon wrote: Why are MO fans so annoying about their manager?

phase.verocity wrote: Mod Organizer helps you stay sane when crashes start to happen as its easy to turn stuff off and on. Nexus is good at making sure things work like they were intended but takes a lot longer to trouble shoot and all the mods need to be physically uninstalled. It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder. Some script extensions will only work in NMM for some reason. If you're using mod organizer you need to physically copy them to the data folder.

What we need is a combination of both organizers that overcomes these limitations. With each mod there should be a choice to install it to the data folder or a virtual folder. It could then keep track of every mod it installed into the data folder which would be rather simple as there aren't many that would need to be physically in it. You could put an option in the setup to only use virtual files or only use physical installation or both which could also be turned off and on in the settings. It would also use less space as the virtual folder would be minimal. Finally it would be awesome if it also had the ability to create bashed patches so we didn't need to run external programs.

Mikanoshi wrote: > takes a lot longer to trouble shoot and all the mods need to be physically uninstalled
Just uncheck esp. Uninstall and reinstall are quick though (see below why) if you want to get rid of meshes/textures/etc too.

> It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder
Yeah... no. Heard about hard links?)

phase.verocity wrote: Nope. haven't discovered the hard links in NMM. I just noticed the folder that says virtual and the second copy of the files in the actual data location. I didn't think the current NMM used hard links.

I thought of another plus for NMM though. It allows you to choose individual files to overwrite in other mods rather that mod organizers way which moves the whole mods folder up or down.

Using NMM I turned all mods off to trouble shoot a fallout 4 crash just two days ago. Even on SSD drives it took a good 10 mins to uninstall the 180 or so mods. I tried turning off the esp first but it didn't pick up the crash mod until I had uninstalled and reinstalled all of the mods. The crash was happening between plenty of exploration and functional displays. If i picked up everything in the exploration rooms it would crash when i left the room until i turned off functional displays.

Mikanoshi wrote: It not only overwrites files of the first mod with the files from the second mod, it also restores overwrited files of a first mod when you uninstall the second one.
I'm certain uninstall/reinstall just creates new hard links, reinstall doesn't even bring up FOMOD installer. You have to select "Uninstall > From all profiles" to remove mod's files, next install will be from mod's archive.

phase.verocity wrote: I've checked out hard links and now they have a nice little red mark on their icons. So i'm pretty sure its using hard links which is good. The down side is that the directory is still dirty as mods leave stuff in the directory.. Mod Organizer handles that with an overwrite folder. Also if I wanted to copy just the fallout 4 folder I wouldn't be able to as the hard links get copied with it. I used to like doing that to clean it with Mod Organizer.

Another issue with NMM when re enabling mods is the constant picking of which files need to overwrite which files. In Mod organizer if a virtual folder was set it was set. It could just be turned off and on without a bunch of do you want to overwrite questions. When trouble shooting it is a lot easier and takes a lot less time if you don't get a bunch of questions about reinstalling.

There is also the issue of changing computers. With mod organizer i can just copy the mod organizer folder over.

Pabulum wrote: If I got somebody pissed off over this, sorry.

Actually, that sounds awful. Those are all of my favorite things about MO.

No FOMod isn't as bad as you think. Same with the download with manager function. It just takes some patience to figure it out and once you get it, it's perfectly fine.

It also uses twice as much space as mod organizer as it has to keep a copy of you're mods in the virtual folder and in the data folder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_link - Wrye Bash doesn't use Symbolic Links to handle everything. It doesn't work like Nexus Mod Manager. Do not assume that. It takes the files from the archive and extracts them to the data folder.

Just uncheck esp. Uninstall and reinstall are quick though (see below why) if you want to get rid of meshes/textures/etc too.

It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing.

Another issue with NMM when re enabling mods is the constant picking of which files need to overwrite which files.

Have you read the comments? I don't use or like Nexus Mod Manager. Drag, drop, and "anneal". That's Wrye Bash.

I'm certain uninstall/reinstall just creates new hard links, reinstall doesn't even bring up FOMOD installer. You have to select "Uninstall > From all profiles" to remove mod's files, next install will be from mod's archive.

I remember when people actually read responses. READ IT! You will get it then.


End. Do not reply to this.

Ethreon wrote: "It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing."

This happens regardless of the mod manager you use - removing mods mid save is not recommended.

Mikanoshi wrote: > It runs the chance of corrupting the files and crashing.

What are you even talking about? What files? Unchecking esp crashes game if it is not able to load some objects from savegame, but there are ways to avoid it.

> I remember when people actually read responses. READ IT! You will get it then.

I was not replying to you. Who are you and what do you want?

phase.verocity wrote: Lol. funny funny. You know mod organizer makes chocolate popcorn but NMM only makes strawberry popcorn. Wyrebash just has plain popcorn. Why can't we have a mixed bag of popcorn? I suppose the biggest turn off of Mod organizer for me with fallout 4 is that I can't get it working due to some permission bugs. Wyre bash on the other hand doesn't recognize any of the pre skyrim mods that i loaded into the game and in any case its not a troubleshooting tool for meshes and textures. Actually the only thing i use wyre bash for is making a bashed patch and sometimes to see if i'm missing a master file.

I 100% agree with u. 4 years in modding, using both MO and NMM, final result for me is that MO interface is the most flexible tools for modding experience.

[Thandal]

I 100% agree with u. 4 years in modding, using both MO and NMM, final result for me is that MO interface is the most flexible tools for modding experience.

 

Perhaps. If, and only if, you restrict your modded gaming to the (very small number of) specific BethSoft games MO supports. :whistling:

[Ethreon]

In response to post #48508347.

Thandal wrote:

I 100% agree with u. 4 years in modding, using both MO and NMM, final result for me is that MO interface is the most flexible tools for modding experience.

 

Perhaps. If, and only if, you restrict your modded gaming to the (very small number of) specific BethSoft games MO supports. :whistling:

shhh, don't bring logic to fanboys, they'll break.

[AWESOMEDUDE5475]

I honestly wouldn't mind drawing up an idea for free if you want. lol