An update on Vortex development

[CzBuCHi]

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, #54947498, #55048508, #55052853, #55055883 are all replies on the same post.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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/?

Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

Dark0ne wrote:

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.

Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions?

Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.*

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.

Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.

*Replying from the forum is annoying*

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.

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.)

Dark0ne wrote:

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.

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.

fireundubh wrote:

Silence speaks for itself.

Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

calscks wrote: 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.

literallybyronic wrote: If "many" people didn't want the two main features that differentiate MO from NMM, then MO wouldn't even still be a thing, Tannin would not have been hired, and this discussion wouldn't be happening. There's no need to get your knickers twisted just because users are giving preliminary feedback that isn't 100% positive. I'm just dubious that they can achieve the same speed and functionality without using a VFS. From the likelihood of it adding an extra few seconds every time you change mod order to the fact that the time it takes to switch profiles in NMM vs MO is exponentially longer, I just don't see it as a feasible option. But I'm not going to write off the fact that the dev team might actually come through and surprise me, I'm not saying Vortex will be horrible or throwing hate, just saying at the end of the day, those features are almost always why people switch to MO in the first place, so why would anyone want to switch back without them?

DragoonPreston wrote: As an IT expert, going by how the engine is described to work in the last post. Switching between profiles will take at most seconds for very slow computers. And here's why I believe this.

First some background Info you're going to need to know;

Symbolic Links and Hard Links, for those who don't know what they are I'll describe them as short as I can. Symbolic Links are pointers to a file, like someone giving you directions to a place. Hard Links are files existing in more than one place in your file manager (AKA Windows Explorer), while still being only one file saved on your storage medium (AKA Hard Drive). This means you can have your files in more than one place, and it won't take up any more room on your storage medium.

Any program looking at one of these links will see the original file, thus drastically improving compatibility with other programs.

From what was said the new system will use those types of links to determine what files will "Be in the data folder". And because how easy it is to make links, profiles will likely just be a file of link locations that will be loaded when you load a profile. Clearing out the old links (saved in the profile you switch from) and put the new links in the folder. Thereby allowing you to have near limitless amounts of profiles while using very little room.

All the hard work of determining the links and what files should be used will likely be done while installing mods.

This method is also much safer than the use of a fully virtual file system, as it's a part of how modern Operating Systems work in the first place. I won't go deep into detail but if you want to know more search how files are actually saved onto a storage medium (Hard Drive).

I will also say if my educated guesses are correct you will have all the powerful functions of MO with a fully stable and safe implementation. Including the mod install order stuff, as it's just deciding what links to use. And allow nearly any program to be added with minimal effort, Not just games.

Finally I must say I have no part in the development of this product. I'm just an interested party trying to help others understand how the system may work.

DFX2K9 wrote: I'll add to this that Vortex must be functional for all of the games Nexus manages, including some games that are older or use different libraries to access files. If all you play are Bethesda games, that's not a problem, use MO. But not every game (or every system for that matter *cue the glaring at his own PC*) plays well with the way MO's runtime virtualization works. Dark0ne and Tannrin picked the most compatible approach for the largest number of games on the platform.

And as Tannrin said when he discussed it: Vortex can easily have a plugin made later to enable that as an option once the program itself gets a thorough testing.

From my perspective symbolic/hard links are best - maily because it is file system native feature and therefore more robust (and tested). Also why use vfs, when same thing can be done without vfs?
Also all links would be created during mod install/uninstall/reorder phase - u could uninstall Vortex and game would still use installed mods...

[ozoak]

I'll be curious to see the load on the filesystem in our scenario, where there are 3 users for the PC who all game, 2 of whom use multiple profiles, 1 of those with half a dozen profiles. The way that plays out we will be 'resetting' the profile, ie: the links, very frequently. Not sure the scale of that, to be honest I've never looked at a count of how many individual files are in use across for example the 200+ mods used in Skyrim or Fallout4.

 

That's all just a curiosity, not a criticism. Genuinely wondering how many links will get erased/rewritten on a profile change.

[OH72]

In response to post #55826861. #55826971, #55827211 are all replies on the same post.

FilthyCasual523 wrote: Without MO's style of virtualization I don't see how useful this new manager would be compared to the previous NMM. MO's style of virtualization was what set it apart from and made it superior to every other manager out there.

The way Vortex is being described, I won't be able to use different mod loadouts for different character profiles the way I could with MO, or pretty much any of MO's other functions. It sounds like all it is, is a new NMM that's supposed to be virtual but really isn't considering the mods are still getting installed in the data folder.

Ethreon wrote: https://rd.nexusmods.com/fallout4/news/13257

Read before you blabber.

FilthyCasual523 wrote: I did read. That was what I gleaned from it.

FilthyCasual523

How did you glean from it that mods are installed in the data folder when it uses LINKS?

[zixaphir]

Judging by the comments on the virtualization structure of Vortex, I could hardly argue the feedback is already unhelpful, lol.

[Ethreon]

In response to post #55972721.

zixaphir wrote: Judging by the comments on the virtualization structure of Vortex, I could hardly argue the feedback is already unhelpful, lol.

There's no actual feedback, just people trying to guess stuff and tell the devs what is better. We all know how people on the internet are suddenly experts in everything.

[FilthyCasual523]

In response to post #55826861. #55826971, #55827211, #55963086 are all replies on the same post.

FilthyCasual523 wrote: Without MO's style of virtualization I don't see how useful this new manager would be compared to the previous NMM. MO's style of virtualization was what set it apart from and made it superior to every other manager out there.

The way Vortex is being described, I won't be able to use different mod loadouts for different character profiles the way I could with MO, or pretty much any of MO's other functions. It sounds like all it is, is a new NMM that's supposed to be virtual but really isn't considering the mods are still getting installed in the data folder.

Ethreon wrote: https://rd.nexusmods.com/fallout4/news/13257

Read before you blabber.

FilthyCasual523 wrote: I did read. That was what I gleaned from it.

OH72 wrote: FilthyCasual523

How did you glean from it that mods are installed in the data folder when it uses LINKS?

How did you NOT glean that? Even if it's only links, that's still s*** going into your data folder and staying there. And I have heard NOTHING about MO's save/mod profile system being carried over in any way, shape, or form. Edited December 14, 2017 by FilthyCasual523

[Behelit79]

Never used MO, i've always managed everything (hundreds of mods and merging compilations) with Wrye Bash and NMM and the only feat i've missed was just a detailed list of which files were overwritten by which mods. Since Tannin is working on Vortex i presume it would be a problem no more. My only question is: Will we be able to switch from a NMM installation to a Vortex one? Will it be able to scan VirtualModConfig.xml and adjust itself to it or should we do a clean Skyrim installation?

[psalmist]

Would you consider making a Linux compatible version? If its too much work then how about Wine compatible? The Linux community would so be appreciative. Thanks for your consideration.

[mcdanielskh]

In response to post #55826861. #55826971, #55827211, #55963086, #55981276 are all replies on the same post.

FilthyCasual523 wrote: Without MO's style of virtualization I don't see how useful this new manager would be compared to the previous NMM. MO's style of virtualization was what set it apart from and made it superior to every other manager out there.

The way Vortex is being described, I won't be able to use different mod loadouts for different character profiles the way I could with MO, or pretty much any of MO's other functions. It sounds like all it is, is a new NMM that's supposed to be virtual but really isn't considering the mods are still getting installed in the data folder.

Ethreon wrote: https://rd.nexusmods.com/fallout4/news/13257

Read before you blabber.

FilthyCasual523 wrote: I did read. That was what I gleaned from it.

OH72 wrote: FilthyCasual523

How did you glean from it that mods are installed in the data folder when it uses LINKS?

FilthyCasual523 wrote: How did you NOT glean that? Even if it's only links, that's still s*** going into your data folder and staying there. And I have heard NOTHING about MO's save/mod profile system being carried over in any way, shape, or form.

The way I understand Symbolic Links is that they are like advanced shortcuts .
Not sure how the links will be implemented but my guess is that Links to the actual mod files will get inserted into the Data directory at game startup via Vortex and when the game exits those links get deleted leaving a clean Data folder that way you can have multiple profiles and such without problems.

[mcdanielskh]

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, #54947498, #55048508, #55052853, #55055883, #55940731, #56017221 are all replies on the same post.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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/?

Qrygg wrote: I'm confused... where does it say there will be no virtualization?

Dark0ne wrote:

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.

Ethreon wrote: You expect rando user who doesn't know what's in his data folder to remember previous discussions?

Valyn81 wrote: *Delete this comment, content moved to my first reply.*

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.

Valyn81 wrote: They said MO1 not MO2.

*Replying from the forum is annoying*

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.

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.)

Dark0ne wrote:

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.

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.

fireundubh wrote:

Silence speaks for itself.

Silence doesn't speak for itself, hence its name.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

calscks wrote: 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.

literallybyronic wrote: If "many" people didn't want the two main features that differentiate MO from NMM, then MO wouldn't even still be a thing, Tannin would not have been hired, and this discussion wouldn't be happening. There's no need to get your knickers twisted just because users are giving preliminary feedback that isn't 100% positive. I'm just dubious that they can achieve the same speed and functionality without using a VFS. From the likelihood of it adding an extra few seconds every time you change mod order to the fact that the time it takes to switch profiles in NMM vs MO is exponentially longer, I just don't see it as a feasible option. But I'm not going to write off the fact that the dev team might actually come through and surprise me, I'm not saying Vortex will be horrible or throwing hate, just saying at the end of the day, those features are almost always why people switch to MO in the first place, so why would anyone want to switch back without them?

DragoonPreston wrote: As an IT expert, going by how the engine is described to work in the last post. Switching between profiles will take at most seconds for very slow computers. And here's why I believe this.

First some background Info you're going to need to know;

Symbolic Links and Hard Links, for those who don't know what they are I'll describe them as short as I can. Symbolic Links are pointers to a file, like someone giving you directions to a place. Hard Links are files existing in more than one place in your file manager (AKA Windows Explorer), while still being only one file saved on your storage medium (AKA Hard Drive). This means you can have your files in more than one place, and it won't take up any more room on your storage medium.

Any program looking at one of these links will see the original file, thus drastically improving compatibility with other programs.

From what was said the new system will use those types of links to determine what files will "Be in the data folder". And because how easy it is to make links, profiles will likely just be a file of link locations that will be loaded when you load a profile. Clearing out the old links (saved in the profile you switch from) and put the new links in the folder. Thereby allowing you to have near limitless amounts of profiles while using very little room.

All the hard work of determining the links and what files should be used will likely be done while installing mods.

This method is also much safer than the use of a fully virtual file system, as it's a part of how modern Operating Systems work in the first place. I won't go deep into detail but if you want to know more search how files are actually saved onto a storage medium (Hard Drive).

I will also say if my educated guesses are correct you will have all the powerful functions of MO with a fully stable and safe implementation. Including the mod install order stuff, as it's just deciding what links to use. And allow nearly any program to be added with minimal effort, Not just games.

Finally I must say I have no part in the development of this product. I'm just an interested party trying to help others understand how the system may work.

DFX2K9 wrote: I'll add to this that Vortex must be functional for all of the games Nexus manages, including some games that are older or use different libraries to access files. If all you play are Bethesda games, that's not a problem, use MO. But not every game (or every system for that matter *cue the glaring at his own PC*) plays well with the way MO's runtime virtualization works. Dark0ne and Tannrin picked the most compatible approach for the largest number of games on the platform.

And as Tannrin said when he discussed it: Vortex can easily have a plugin made later to enable that as an option once the program itself gets a thorough testing.

CzBuCHi wrote: From my perspective symbolic/hard links are best - maily because it is file system native feature and therefore more robust (and tested). Also why use vfs, when same thing can be done without vfs?
Also all links would be created during mod install/uninstall/reorder phase - u could uninstall Vortex and game would still use installed mods...

mcdanielskh wrote: Double post please remove

Oblivionplayer437
I believe you're right, Lets wait and see. Vortex may very well find itself competing with MO2. How ironic. However, I have high hopes for Vortex (I still hate the name though :) )
There is a saying "The proof is in the pudding" Google it if you have never heard it. BTW I would gladly pay money to get Vortex done faster. Is that possible? Edited December 16, 2017 by mcdanielskh