SirTwist Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 In response to post #54930308. #54930478, #54930773, #54930833, #54930843, #54930848, #54930913, #54931018, #54931133, #54931298, #54931363, #54931473, #54931588, #54932243, #54933863, #54934008, #54934293, #54934383, #54935133, #54936008, #54939378, #54939888, #54941398 are all replies on the same post. Reveal hidden contents Quote Kevin843 wrote: Like I said before no REAL virtual data=no using Vortex, I dont want my data folder messed up and ability to reorder mods is what makes MO2 the best mod manager. I am disappointed it is highly anticipated it will not have a virtual data like MO2. Hopefully there will still be community builds of MO2 for future Bethesda games. No way I can go back to installing mods to data folder now. I wont even bother using it if it dosent have these "Essential" MO2 features. Quote Zora wrote: I agree, not using a virtual file system is a step-back from what could be a huge improvement to mod managers we've seen so far. I still have high hopes for Vortex and will probably use it either way. Quote SarahTheMascara wrote: I agree. Keeping the data folder clean is essential for me as well. I have so many different builds for Skyrim and I'm jumping back and forth between profiles regularly. Quote BlueGunk wrote: From the interview with Tannin, 10 May 2017:Robin: I think we both know the biggest questions we've received around Vortex have been in regards to virtualisation and how Vortex will handle and store files on people's hard-drives. Is Vortex going to use virtualisation?Tannin: Yes it does.I know people have - often very strong - opinions on the topic so I ask that you please read my reasons before you go to the comments and vent.In the initial release of Vortex, virtualisation will be implemented using links (symbolic or hard links), similar to NMM v0.6. We've left the door open so we can implement different approaches (i.e. the usvfs library from Mod Organizer) but at this point I don't think there will be a "no virtualisation" option. Quote Dark0ne wrote: Thanks for your feedback.If you're not interested in a mod manager that doesn't use MO's functionality VFS, that's fine. But this is about Vortex, not MO.I'll be deleting any more comments that follow this line of thought as it's completely irrelevant to what I've talked about in this news article. Quote Yggdrasil7557 wrote: There are many reasons for this, Tannin is the original developer of mod organizer, and he was one of the people who decided not to use virtual filing. the new program will feature mod managing methods similar to how mod organizer currently works, the file managing will be able to work in many the same ways that mo does, the only difference is that it will actually place the files in the correct locations, this is for the same reason that el presidente gave up on mo2, the crashes due to virtual filing, especially in 64 bit are far too complex. for more info go read all previous posts about vortex, including the post where tannin said he was discontinuing development of mo1 Quote Valyn81 wrote: Remember that it is not the same thing as the old NMM did, corrupting your data folder easily.TanninOne is helping them make the new Vortex, so you know Vortex will have some aspect of MO2 in order to help minimize data folder corruption.*EDIT*Seems BlueGunk, Yggdrasil7557, and I all have the same thought at about the same time, lol. :wub: Here is the link to help the people with Facts about Vortex and its Virtualization:https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/13257/? Quote Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization? Quote Dark0ne wrote: Quote I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?They're getting confused (which is kind of telling), there is virtualisation, it's just not the same as MO's virtualisation, which is what they are actually taking issue with.We already did a Q&A with Tannin where it was explained why Tannin had decided to choose a different method, so the fact this needs to be brought up in a different news article about a different topic is...odd...to say the least.If not using MO's virtualisation is a "no deal" for you, I just don't really understand why you're here, posting it as a comment in a completely unrelated article about Vortex. Quote Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions? Quote Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.* Quote AnyOldName3 wrote: Mod Organizer 2 doesn't seem to actually be abandoned anymore. There were commits today, for example, which doesn't suggest to me that it's abandoned. Quote Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.*Replying from the forum is annoying* Quote ousnius wrote: A clean data folder is really not an argument for using or not using Vortex. It really isn't.You're saying you're switching profiles all the time, but these are all things that are still possible (just as easily and quickly) as with NMM or MO. Just instead of doing it at runtime, the hard links are handling it within seconds. This was all explained in the previous news post already. Quote opusGlass wrote: I'm sorry Dark0ne, but it seems like you guys are trying to dodge the issue here. Whether or not the underlying mechanism is the same as MO, there is one feature where NMM has never reached the bar. That is the ability to reorder the mod install order. In Mod Organizer, if ModA and ModB both have a copy of the same file and ModB is winning, you can move ModB above ModA and now ModA is winning. In NMM on the other hand, you have to uninstall and reinstall ModA. Additionally, in MO you can uninstall and reinstall ModA without altering the fact that ModB wins the conflict, another necessary function for debugging a mod list.If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.(And this is really a secondary issue, but I just want to point out that a clean Data folder is an important feature for many mod authors, who need to be able to package their mod files from Data without having to sort through thousands of files to figure out which ones belong to that mod. This isn't a problem for me because I've developed a workflow that doesn't rely on the true Data folder, but a few months ago that would've been a deal breaker for me, and I'm sure it still is for some authors.) Quote Dark0ne wrote: Quote If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.The majority of complaints are because users want "a clean data folder" and aren't related to what you're talking about at all.If you haven't heard anything about a particular aspect of Vortex it's because we're not ready to talk about it yet. Indeed, we'd rather wait until users actually used Vortex and saw how Tannin has implemented things, rather than trying to explain it to users and have them misunderstand or arbitrarily dismiss the methods Tannin has come up with as inferior based on no actual understanding of the issue. Quote VaultBoyAM wrote: @opusGlass You should read the original post AND all the replies by Tannin. He's already mentioned that you can set mod conflict victory, not exactly a mod install order, but you'll get the same end result. Quote fireundubh wrote: Quote Silence speaks for itself.Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name. Quote velvetsanity wrote: El presidents hasn’t given up on MO2. He’s still working on it. I know this because a friend of mine is testing things in it for him. Quote lued123 wrote: Actually, Tannin has said that you can control "installation order" in Vortex. It's just a little different in that you don't control the entire priority order. You just set the order for the mods that need to be in a specific order. You say "Put mod B under mod A" rather than "Put all of my 300 mods in this exact order." Quote literallybyronic wrote: Honestly, without BOTH of those features (clean data folder/drag and drop install ordering) i will never use Vortex, period. I wouldn't even bother to try it out unless I knew those features were there, no matter how pretty it looks or how many other bells and whistles are added. I would bet that many, many experienced modders will feel exactly the same way. Quote Ethreon wrote: Still going on and on about how "many" want something you want. No, some want that. Many just wanna use mods, they don't really give a crap about virtualization or clean data. Quote Oblivionplayer437 wrote: Vortex will have to provide some serious advantages over MO2 in order to sway MO user to switch, none the least because development is ongoing with MO, albeit at a slow pace. But even the somewhat buggy present version of MO 2.0.8.3 is plenty good to manage modlists. We shall see soon enough what Vortex will be, and until then we should probably just shut up and wait. Devs are set on their course and will not change anything just because some unhappy peeps in here "demand" things. Some commentors have such a wrong attitude.Actually, there will be virtualization. They aren't going to cut it out. It will be similar to what NMM currently uses, and leave the way open for further virtualization, such as what MO2 uses. Or even a different system. And there won't be a no virtualization option. That, to me, is pretty clear. So, yes, Vortex will leave the data folders alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirTwist Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Thank you for the update. I have been waiting to hear from someone what is going on. Tannin, Kit, and others, thank you so much for your time so far. I will be patiently waiting to see what is next. Again, thank you, and godspeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crowbar01 Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 In response to post #54930308. #54930478, #54930773, #54930833, #54930843, #54930848, #54930913, #54931018, #54931133, #54931298, #54931363, #54931473, #54931588, #54932243, #54933863, #54934008, #54934293, #54934383, #54935133, #54936008, #54939378, #54939888, #54941398, #54945963 are all replies on the same post. Reveal hidden contents Quote Kevin843 wrote: Like I said before no REAL virtual data=no using Vortex, I dont want my data folder messed up and ability to reorder mods is what makes MO2 the best mod manager. I am disappointed it is highly anticipated it will not have a virtual data like MO2. Hopefully there will still be community builds of MO2 for future Bethesda games. No way I can go back to installing mods to data folder now. I wont even bother using it if it dosent have these "Essential" MO2 features. Quote Zora wrote: I agree, not using a virtual file system is a step-back from what could be a huge improvement to mod managers we've seen so far. I still have high hopes for Vortex and will probably use it either way. Quote SarahTheMascara wrote: I agree. Keeping the data folder clean is essential for me as well. I have so many different builds for Skyrim and I'm jumping back and forth between profiles regularly. Quote BlueGunk wrote: From the interview with Tannin, 10 May 2017:Robin: I think we both know the biggest questions we've received around Vortex have been in regards to virtualisation and how Vortex will handle and store files on people's hard-drives. Is Vortex going to use virtualisation?Tannin: Yes it does.I know people have - often very strong - opinions on the topic so I ask that you please read my reasons before you go to the comments and vent.In the initial release of Vortex, virtualisation will be implemented using links (symbolic or hard links), similar to NMM v0.6. We've left the door open so we can implement different approaches (i.e. the usvfs library from Mod Organizer) but at this point I don't think there will be a "no virtualisation" option. Quote Dark0ne wrote: Thanks for your feedback.If you're not interested in a mod manager that doesn't use MO's functionality VFS, that's fine. But this is about Vortex, not MO.I'll be deleting any more comments that follow this line of thought as it's completely irrelevant to what I've talked about in this news article. Quote Yggdrasil7557 wrote: There are many reasons for this, Tannin is the original developer of mod organizer, and he was one of the people who decided not to use virtual filing. the new program will feature mod managing methods similar to how mod organizer currently works, the file managing will be able to work in many the same ways that mo does, the only difference is that it will actually place the files in the correct locations, this is for the same reason that el presidente gave up on mo2, the crashes due to virtual filing, especially in 64 bit are far too complex. for more info go read all previous posts about vortex, including the post where tannin said he was discontinuing development of mo1 Quote Valyn81 wrote: Remember that it is not the same thing as the old NMM did, corrupting your data folder easily.TanninOne is helping them make the new Vortex, so you know Vortex will have some aspect of MO2 in order to help minimize data folder corruption.*EDIT*Seems BlueGunk, Yggdrasil7557, and I all have the same thought at about the same time, lol. :wub: Here is the link to help the people with Facts about Vortex and its Virtualization:https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/13257/? Quote Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization? Quote Dark0ne wrote: Quote I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?They're getting confused (which is kind of telling), there is virtualisation, it's just not the same as MO's virtualisation, which is what they are actually taking issue with.We already did a Q&A with Tannin where it was explained why Tannin had decided to choose a different method, so the fact this needs to be brought up in a different news article about a different topic is...odd...to say the least.If not using MO's virtualisation is a "no deal" for you, I just don't really understand why you're here, posting it as a comment in a completely unrelated article about Vortex. Quote Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions? Quote Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.* Quote AnyOldName3 wrote: Mod Organizer 2 doesn't seem to actually be abandoned anymore. There were commits today, for example, which doesn't suggest to me that it's abandoned. Quote Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.*Replying from the forum is annoying* Quote ousnius wrote: A clean data folder is really not an argument for using or not using Vortex. It really isn't.You're saying you're switching profiles all the time, but these are all things that are still possible (just as easily and quickly) as with NMM or MO. Just instead of doing it at runtime, the hard links are handling it within seconds. This was all explained in the previous news post already. Quote opusGlass wrote: I'm sorry Dark0ne, but it seems like you guys are trying to dodge the issue here. Whether or not the underlying mechanism is the same as MO, there is one feature where NMM has never reached the bar. That is the ability to reorder the mod install order. In Mod Organizer, if ModA and ModB both have a copy of the same file and ModB is winning, you can move ModB above ModA and now ModA is winning. In NMM on the other hand, you have to uninstall and reinstall ModA. Additionally, in MO you can uninstall and reinstall ModA without altering the fact that ModB wins the conflict, another necessary function for debugging a mod list.If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.(And this is really a secondary issue, but I just want to point out that a clean Data folder is an important feature for many mod authors, who need to be able to package their mod files from Data without having to sort through thousands of files to figure out which ones belong to that mod. This isn't a problem for me because I've developed a workflow that doesn't rely on the true Data folder, but a few months ago that would've been a deal breaker for me, and I'm sure it still is for some authors.) Quote Dark0ne wrote: Quote If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.The majority of complaints are because users want "a clean data folder" and aren't related to what you're talking about at all.If you haven't heard anything about a particular aspect of Vortex it's because we're not ready to talk about it yet. Indeed, we'd rather wait until users actually used Vortex and saw how Tannin has implemented things, rather than trying to explain it to users and have them misunderstand or arbitrarily dismiss the methods Tannin has come up with as inferior based on no actual understanding of the issue. Quote VaultBoyAM wrote: @opusGlass You should read the original post AND all the replies by Tannin. He's already mentioned that you can set mod conflict victory, not exactly a mod install order, but you'll get the same end result. Quote fireundubh wrote: Quote Silence speaks for itself.Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name. Quote velvetsanity wrote: El presidents hasn’t given up on MO2. He’s still working on it. I know this because a friend of mine is testing things in it for him. Quote lued123 wrote: Actually, Tannin has said that you can control "installation order" in Vortex. It's just a little different in that you don't control the entire priority order. You just set the order for the mods that need to be in a specific order. You say "Put mod B under mod A" rather than "Put all of my 300 mods in this exact order." Quote literallybyronic wrote: Honestly, without BOTH of those features (clean data folder/drag and drop install ordering) i will never use Vortex, period. I wouldn't even bother to try it out unless I knew those features were there, no matter how pretty it looks or how many other bells and whistles are added. I would bet that many, many experienced modders will feel exactly the same way. Quote Ethreon wrote: Still going on and on about how "many" want something you want. No, some want that. Many just wanna use mods, they don't really give a crap about virtualization or clean data. Quote Oblivionplayer437 wrote: Vortex will have to provide some serious advantages over MO2 in order to sway MO user to switch, none the least because development is ongoing with MO, albeit at a slow pace. But even the somewhat buggy present version of MO 2.0.8.3 is plenty good to manage modlists. We shall see soon enough what Vortex will be, and until then we should probably just shut up and wait. Devs are set on their course and will not change anything just because some unhappy peeps in here "demand" things. Some commentors have such a wrong attitude. Quote SirTwist wrote: Actually, there will be virtualization. They aren't going to cut it out. It will be similar to what NMM currently uses, and leave the way open for further virtualization, such as what MO2 uses. Or even a different system. And there won't be a no virtualization option. That, to me, is pretty clear. So, yes, Vortex will leave the data folders alone.I read "I want this, I want that" ...who says it doesn't already? My advice: just wait, you'll probably be surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkylerModder Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 In response to post #54943263. Reveal hidden contents Quote Levionte wrote: As a relatively competent mod user, I have been pretty indifferent towards the NMM vs MO debate. I recognize MO has more features built in, plus it's definitely faster and more responsive. But it wasn't enough to make me switch from NMM until I was in a position of needing to reinstall Skyrim anyway. I did make the switch a few months ago and, having used MO since then, I stand by my original assessment. It's an upgrade, but doesn't offer anything I couldn't do myself with my previous NMM setup and good modding practices.However, as a mod creator, I've found the difference to be gigantic. When I'm making mods, I'm not following good modding practices; it's not practical. I'm dropping things into my data folder manually, then I'm constantly adding, removing, or otherwise tweaking things throughout development. When I am finally in a position to create a mod package, I have to dig through my data folder for things I've put there.And while I try my best to keep things organized, assets are required to be separated by type. My meshes folder has base assets, face geometry stuff, and outfit stuff someone else made that I'm using. Textures are in a similar situation. Animation files, behavior files, FNIS stuff go somewhere else. Sound is split into voice, effects and music files. And don't get me started on the scripts being lumped into the same folder as every other script for the game. There's a lot of stuff to keep track of, sometimes weeks and months after putting them there. Heaven forbid I work on more than one mod at a time.I know not all mods are so encompassing, but for some of us, having everything thrown into one folder I can change on the fly like MO does is a tremendous time-saver when it comes to development. Not to mention trying to create an environment suitable for testing the mod. With NMM, I end up having multiple "mod installations" of a release build and loose files I can still modify. Then I am constantly on the verge of forgetting a file and then having NMM uninstall it and erasing all of my changes for the old version still in the archive.I make this long, and somewhat dramatic, rant because all I hear about is how the new mod manager can serve the average mod user. And that's fair; they're the majority. But mod creators are pretty important to the community, so it'd be nice to make some features for us, too. It's not like MO is the perfect solution. It really is inconvenient to get lip files to generate, scripts to compile, preview things in nifskope, etc.. Can we borrow just a thought or two from the "which data folder is cleanest" debate and spend it on the mod creator's experience?+1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunsmann Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 In response to post #54935243. #54935523 is also a reply to the same post. Reveal hidden contents Quote MysteriousGuy wrote: "Not long now!"We are talking 2 months minimum here. It was months in development already. Makes me wonder how was Tannin able to build fully functional mod organizer in such a short time when he was working all alone, but its not the case now when he has whole team around him.So after months of waiting for something, you cant even provide a screenshot to public? Really? Quote fluxxdog wrote: Yes really.Perhaps it was purely due to MO only needing to support ONE game. Vortex (like NMM) will be supporting many different games.All I want is for FNIS to install and work out of the box (like it does in NMM). MO is a pain in the arse with FNIS, and abandoned almost straight away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oooii3gg Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 I was pretty happy with Mod Organizer, I have no idea why you decided to throw everything out and start from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunsmann Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 In response to post #54947243. Reveal hidden contents Quote oooii3gg wrote: I was pretty happy with Mod Organizer, I have no idea why you decided to throw everything out and start from scratch.Vortex is replacing Nexus Mod Manager. Not MO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscks Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 (edited) In response to post #54930308. #54930478, #54930773, #54930833, #54930843, #54930848, #54930913, #54931018, #54931133, #54931298, #54931363, #54931473, #54931588, #54932243, #54933863, #54934008, #54934293, #54934383, #54935133, #54936008, #54939378, #54939888, #54941398, #54945963, #54946478 are all replies on the same post. Reveal hidden contents Quote Kevin843 wrote: Like I said before no REAL virtual data=no using Vortex, I dont want my data folder messed up and ability to reorder mods is what makes MO2 the best mod manager. I am disappointed it is highly anticipated it will not have a virtual data like MO2. Hopefully there will still be community builds of MO2 for future Bethesda games. No way I can go back to installing mods to data folder now. I wont even bother using it if it dosent have these "Essential" MO2 features. Quote Zora wrote: I agree, not using a virtual file system is a step-back from what could be a huge improvement to mod managers we've seen so far. I still have high hopes for Vortex and will probably use it either way. Quote SarahTheMascara wrote: I agree. Keeping the data folder clean is essential for me as well. I have so many different builds for Skyrim and I'm jumping back and forth between profiles regularly. Quote BlueGunk wrote: From the interview with Tannin, 10 May 2017:Robin: I think we both know the biggest questions we've received around Vortex have been in regards to virtualisation and how Vortex will handle and store files on people's hard-drives. Is Vortex going to use virtualisation?Tannin: Yes it does.I know people have - often very strong - opinions on the topic so I ask that you please read my reasons before you go to the comments and vent.In the initial release of Vortex, virtualisation will be implemented using links (symbolic or hard links), similar to NMM v0.6. We've left the door open so we can implement different approaches (i.e. the usvfs library from Mod Organizer) but at this point I don't think there will be a "no virtualisation" option. Quote Dark0ne wrote: Thanks for your feedback.If you're not interested in a mod manager that doesn't use MO's functionality VFS, that's fine. But this is about Vortex, not MO.I'll be deleting any more comments that follow this line of thought as it's completely irrelevant to what I've talked about in this news article. Quote Yggdrasil7557 wrote: There are many reasons for this, Tannin is the original developer of mod organizer, and he was one of the people who decided not to use virtual filing. the new program will feature mod managing methods similar to how mod organizer currently works, the file managing will be able to work in many the same ways that mo does, the only difference is that it will actually place the files in the correct locations, this is for the same reason that el presidente gave up on mo2, the crashes due to virtual filing, especially in 64 bit are far too complex. for more info go read all previous posts about vortex, including the post where tannin said he was discontinuing development of mo1 Quote Valyn81 wrote: Remember that it is not the same thing as the old NMM did, corrupting your data folder easily.TanninOne is helping them make the new Vortex, so you know Vortex will have some aspect of MO2 in order to help minimize data folder corruption.*EDIT*Seems BlueGunk, Yggdrasil7557, and I all have the same thought at about the same time, lol. :wub: Here is the link to help the people with Facts about Vortex and its Virtualization:https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/13257/? Quote Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization? Quote Dark0ne wrote: Quote I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?They're getting confused (which is kind of telling), there is virtualisation, it's just not the same as MO's virtualisation, which is what they are actually taking issue with.We already did a Q&A with Tannin where it was explained why Tannin had decided to choose a different method, so the fact this needs to be brought up in a different news article about a different topic is...odd...to say the least.If not using MO's virtualisation is a "no deal" for you, I just don't really understand why you're here, posting it as a comment in a completely unrelated article about Vortex. Quote Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions? Quote Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.* Quote AnyOldName3 wrote: Mod Organizer 2 doesn't seem to actually be abandoned anymore. There were commits today, for example, which doesn't suggest to me that it's abandoned. Quote Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.*Replying from the forum is annoying* Quote ousnius wrote: A clean data folder is really not an argument for using or not using Vortex. It really isn't.You're saying you're switching profiles all the time, but these are all things that are still possible (just as easily and quickly) as with NMM or MO. Just instead of doing it at runtime, the hard links are handling it within seconds. This was all explained in the previous news post already. Quote opusGlass wrote: I'm sorry Dark0ne, but it seems like you guys are trying to dodge the issue here. Whether or not the underlying mechanism is the same as MO, there is one feature where NMM has never reached the bar. That is the ability to reorder the mod install order. In Mod Organizer, if ModA and ModB both have a copy of the same file and ModB is winning, you can move ModB above ModA and now ModA is winning. In NMM on the other hand, you have to uninstall and reinstall ModA. Additionally, in MO you can uninstall and reinstall ModA without altering the fact that ModB wins the conflict, another necessary function for debugging a mod list.If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.(And this is really a secondary issue, but I just want to point out that a clean Data folder is an important feature for many mod authors, who need to be able to package their mod files from Data without having to sort through thousands of files to figure out which ones belong to that mod. This isn't a problem for me because I've developed a workflow that doesn't rely on the true Data folder, but a few months ago that would've been a deal breaker for me, and I'm sure it still is for some authors.) Quote Dark0ne wrote: Quote If you've achieved that functionality, please let us know, so this can end. Otherwise you will continue to get angry posts from grumpy users who are stuck with a buggy MO2.If Tannin has found a way to implement that same functionality with symlinks/hardlinks, then everyone here will be happy. But I haven't seen any confirmation of that, and silence speaks for itself. So far only MO has achieved that vital functionality. That's why everyone keeps harping on about whether or not you're using the same system as MO.The majority of complaints are because users want "a clean data folder" and aren't related to what you're talking about at all.If you haven't heard anything about a particular aspect of Vortex it's because we're not ready to talk about it yet. Indeed, we'd rather wait until users actually used Vortex and saw how Tannin has implemented things, rather than trying to explain it to users and have them misunderstand or arbitrarily dismiss the methods Tannin has come up with as inferior based on no actual understanding of the issue. Quote VaultBoyAM wrote: @opusGlass You should read the original post AND all the replies by Tannin. He's already mentioned that you can set mod conflict victory, not exactly a mod install order, but you'll get the same end result. Quote fireundubh wrote: Quote Silence speaks for itself.Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name. Quote velvetsanity wrote: El presidents hasn’t given up on MO2. He’s still working on it. I know this because a friend of mine is testing things in it for him. Quote lued123 wrote: Actually, Tannin has said that you can control "installation order" in Vortex. It's just a little different in that you don't control the entire priority order. You just set the order for the mods that need to be in a specific order. You say "Put mod B under mod A" rather than "Put all of my 300 mods in this exact order." Quote literallybyronic wrote: Honestly, without BOTH of those features (clean data folder/drag and drop install ordering) i will never use Vortex, period. I wouldn't even bother to try it out unless I knew those features were there, no matter how pretty it looks or how many other bells and whistles are added. I would bet that many, many experienced modders will feel exactly the same way. Quote Ethreon wrote: Still going on and on about how "many" want something you want. No, some want that. Many just wanna use mods, they don't really give a crap about virtualization or clean data. Quote Oblivionplayer437 wrote: Vortex will have to provide some serious advantages over MO2 in order to sway MO user to switch, none the least because development is ongoing with MO, albeit at a slow pace. But even the somewhat buggy present version of MO 2.0.8.3 is plenty good to manage modlists. We shall see soon enough what Vortex will be, and until then we should probably just shut up and wait. Devs are set on their course and will not change anything just because some unhappy peeps in here "demand" things. Some commentors have such a wrong attitude. Quote SirTwist wrote: Actually, there will be virtualization. They aren't going to cut it out. It will be similar to what NMM currently uses, and leave the way open for further virtualization, such as what MO2 uses. Or even a different system. And there won't be a no virtualization option. That, to me, is pretty clear. So, yes, Vortex will leave the data folders alone. Quote CrowbarRX wrote: I read "I want this, I want that" ...who says it doesn't already? My advice: just wait, you'll probably be surprised.more like "I want this, I want that...or else f*k off". it sounds more like a demand without appreciation and take things as granted. a few of them even went as far as ignoring what Dark0ne has been saying then proceed to tell the same tale again. Edited November 4, 2017 by calscks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharraShimada Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 In response to post #54947243. #54947383 is also a reply to the same post. Reveal hidden contents Quote oooii3gg wrote: I was pretty happy with Mod Organizer, I have no idea why you decided to throw everything out and start from scratch. Quote lunsmann wrote: Vortex is replacing Nexus Mod Manager. Not MO. Vortex ist Nexus-Mod-Manager reloaded. Mod-Organizer is a completly different thing.And while Tannin was busy with MO2 development, what somewhat went not so well, Nexus made him the offer to make a new mod manager for them. MO is still in development by other people. I´m sure, Tannin will take some of MO´s features to vortex, and to be honest, NMM needet someone with experience and skill very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharraShimada Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 In response to post #54935243. #54935523, #54947223 are all replies on the same post. Reveal hidden contents Quote MysteriousGuy wrote: "Not long now!"We are talking 2 months minimum here. It was months in development already. Makes me wonder how was Tannin able to build fully functional mod organizer in such a short time when he was working all alone, but its not the case now when he has whole team around him.So after months of waiting for something, you cant even provide a screenshot to public? Really? Quote fluxxdog wrote: Yes really. Quote lunsmann wrote: Perhaps it was purely due to MO only needing to support ONE game. Vortex (like NMM) will be supporting many different games.All I want is for FNIS to install and work out of the box (like it does in NMM). MO is a pain in the arse with FNIS, and abandoned almost straight away. Tannin made MO alone back in the days, when he had the time. And it was only 32 bit. Developing such a tool with full 64 bit support is a completely different thing.Thats why MO2 never was what Tannin was expecting from it.And now, it takes time, because its a team. Tanning cant work all alone, doing things like he wants them to be all by himself. Everything has to be first an idea, moves to a meeting, and later there will be a consensus. Such things take time... a lot of time.And sometimes you try something, test it, and as a result, you throw it into the dumpster, because it wont work.Software-development is time consuming as hell. Its not just coding. In fact, thats, what take the leas amount of the time. Its everying around the lines of code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts