Is Vortex a Mod Manager?

[HadToRegister]

@Rattledagger

 

Thank you for your careful reading of my post and for your insightful comments. I enjoy reading your comments in these Vortex forums because I always learn something from them.

 

I do, however, disagree with your conclusion concerning my first "random thought." I would still argue that using the services of LOOT to enforce a rule that originates with Vortex does not constitute making a LOOT rule. Our focus should be on where the rule originates, not the mechanism by which it's implemented. If the rule originates from LOOT, then it's a LOOT rule. But if it originates from Vortex, then it's a Vortex rule. In this case it's Vortex that first writes that rule to the Userlist.yaml file, not LOOT. The fact that Vortex uses LOOT mechanisms to enforce the rule is irrelevant.

 

Your comment about my third mod manager requirement is quite interesting. I did not realize that Wrye Bash has no install order capability. Are you suggesting that condition #3 not be a necessary condition for a mod manager?

 

Anyway, I'm glad to see that this thread is generating a civil, interesting, and thoughtful conversation.

 

Wrye Bash can keep a file-by-file record of mods, as long as Wrye Bash is the mod manager that installed them.

It also has "Package Order", where you can move the Mod Archives around (like MO2), and have the files of one Mod load before or after another Mod depending on where it is in the Package Order.

You can also set INSTALL order, which determines which package overwrites another.

Simply move the Package, pick

 

Scroll down to the section about Installing Mods, Package Order, Set the Installation Order this is the least understood aspect of Wrye Bash, but people who have used MO2 and Vortex will understand it.

This is something that NMM severely lacks, any ability other than a hard overwrite of MOD Files.

[AugustaCalidia]

@Rattledagger

 

Some further reflections on necessary condition #3 "Allow user-defined changes to install order."

 

When I penned that line, I viewed (and still view) the condition #3 in a very minimalist way. For me, the condition is satisfied if a modding tool can alert the user to a file conflict so that he can resolve it some manner. (And, yes, I am comfortable with using "he" in a gender-neutral sense, just as it's been used for centuries before some angry sisters took offense at it.) Perhaps I need to rewrite the condition to reflect more clearly what I understand it to mean.

[AugustaCalidia]

HTR, thank you for the information about the install order capabilities of Wrye Bash. I've rarely used it for modding purposes and so was totally ignorant of all this. After Rattledagger's post, I was really worried that I had, by definition, excluded Wrye Bash as a mod manager, just as Arthmoor has done with Vortex.

 

(I once built a bashed patch, but I did so by following someone's step-by-step instructions. I used Wrye Bash alongside OBMM when setting up and playing Oblivion. I used Wrye Bash to help organize my saves and to remove bloat. But what I loved the most was its "Repair Abomb" feature.)

[Rattledagger]

My experience with Wrye Bash is minimal, but at least from what I've heard on the per-mod level you can re-order the "install" order, probably in a similar way to how you drag-and-drop mods up and down in MO's left panel.

 

On the per-file level on the other hand most mod managers fails, since in MO your only option (apart for installing multiple copies of mods or splitting mods into smaller pieces) is to hide files, but since hide == re-name file this means any other profile using the now hidden files are broken. Vortex has decidedly the advantage on the per-file level.

 

As for NMM, while NMM does support per-file "install" order, the disadvantage here is it's very difficult to change your choices.

 

In any case, if you keep it at per-mod level, MO, Vortex and Wrye Bash should support option 3.

 

As for LOOT rules, maybe it's semantics, but if I create example a PDF-file it's to me irrelevant if I'm using an Adobe-program to create this PDF-file, a word processor, or for that matter I print to PDF-file. Regardless of how the file is created, it's still a PDF-file. So, at least to me, a file what have the only purpose of organizing and keeping track of some rules that is later interpreted by LOOT will naturally be "LOOT rules", regardless of me manually typing-in the rules by using Notepad, or a more automatic method using LOOT or Vortex that both can create "LOOT rules" files.

[AugustaCalidia]

@Rattledagger

 

 

As for LOOT rules, maybe it's semantics, but if I create example a PDF-file it's to me irrelevant if I'm using an Adobe-program to create this PDF-file, a word processor, or for that matter I print to PDF-file. Regardless of how the file is created, it's still a PDF-file. So, at least to me, a file what have the only purpose of organizing and keeping track of some rules that is later interpreted by LOOT will naturally be "LOOT rules", regardless of me manually typing-in the rules by using Notepad, or a more automatic method using LOOT or Vortex that both can create "LOOT rules" files.

 

Your response is well thought out, and your use of the PDF analogy is very creative. However, I don't think your analogy is applicable to this case. It's true that the program used to generate a PDF file is irrelevant, if we focus on the structure of the file. In this respect, the file is a PDF file no matter what program generates it. (Likewise, with a .yaml file. In regard to structure, it matters not what program generates it. It is a .yaml file regardless.)

 

However, here is the point at which the PDF analogy fails. The analogy takes into account file structure only, but says nothing about content. My argument is based on file content. In particular it is based on the content of Userlist.yaml files in Vortex and LOOT. It matters not which program generates the files or even ultimately reads the files. It does matter, however, where the file information comes from. In the case of load order rules, it's the source that determines whether a rule is a Vortex rule or a LOOT rule. A LOOT rule is generated from the LOOT database, while a Vortex rule is generated by a user who wants to intervene in the LOOT scheme of things and countermand a LOOT rule or rules. Even though the Vortex rule is ultimately read and implemented by a Vortex integrated LOOT, it is still a Vortex rule.

 

But, you may ask, isn't this just a case of semantics? Isn't this really a difference that makes no difference? Although I've made a case for this issue being more than just semantics, I will leave it to others to make up their own minds about this. However, one thing is clear. Whether you call it a Vortex rule or a LOOT rule, the result is a manual override of an existing plugin load order.

[matortheeternal]

My argument.

In order for a modding tool to qualify as a mod manager, it must meet these necessary conditions:

• Be capable of installing and enabling mods
• Allow user-defined changes to load order
• Allow user-defined changes to install order
• Be capable of disabling and uninstalling mods

 

I disagree with these arbitrary conditions for what is defined as a mod manager. In my opinion, a "mod manager" is just a utility which "manages" mods. Management, in this case, only requires the addition and removal of mods to a game. Whether or not "load" or "install" order is involved is entirely dependent on whether or not the game in question even has a concept of such a thing, or if the order is of any significance to how the game in question handles mods. Its not strict requirement, but an optional one which we have gotten used to for Bethesda games. We can technically edit load order manually via plugins.txt and install order can just be the order in which we actually install/activate mods.

 

So, by my definition, Vortex is a mod manager. I would not say, however, that the inability to move plugins with drag and drop in Vortex is a "feature". Rather, I'd identify it as an anti-feature, a step back from what is standard and expected by users from mod managers for Bethesda games (which Vortex is, in addition to being a manager for other games as well). I also don't agree with LOOT's approach to purely-algorithmic load order sorting, I think it's not user-friendly and is a great example of user "coddling" - viz., when an application limits user choice or power because it does not trust the user to make intelligent decisions, and in so doing gimps the user's ability to learn about why certain things work the way they do or resolve issues quickly or seamlessly.

 

But you have to keep in mind, both Vortex and LOOT are tools are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator - the user who knows nothing. Whether or not they actually serve a user who knows nothing well is debatable, but this is certainly central in the design choices made in developing these tools. My personal opinion is that this kind of design creates a tool that users grow out of as they begin to feel the tool constraining their ability to operate efficiently. This is shown by many advanced users choosing not to use LOOT, or to make a multitude of custom rules (which is basically the same as not using it and just sorting manually, just with different work allocation). It is also shown by many users electing to using Mod Organizer 2 instead of Vortex, as it allows them greater power and functionality in managing large and complex mod lists for Bethesda Games.

 

Both LOOT and Vortex serve a purpose in the community and are valuable pieces of software that have delivered meaningful results. However, one of their central design philosophies, "the user is stupid and cannot be trusted", is something that many people disagree with and find annoying.

[Arthmoor]

No he is not correct, he just has a "thing" against Vortex and spreads his incorrect opinion about it.

 

When you manually adjust your load order you are essentially making a loot rule.

He argues against Vortex, but I don't ever recall him saying he's actually USED Vortex, and always comes across that he is basing his opinion solely on hearsay, which is why I don't give his opinion about Vortex much credence.

One does not need to use a LOOT wrapper to know that it's a LOOT wrapper. Especially when the lead developer flat out says it's a LOOT wrapper (not in such direct terms, but still).

 

Since even you admit that "manually adjusting load order" is really making a LOOT rule, then I'd say you're confirming that I am right as well.

 

Since I do not use LOOT, I don't exactly need a LOOT wrapper, thus I don't need to have used Vortex to know I'd get nothing out of it. Plus the virtualization system it uses is of no appeal to me whatsoever for installing mods either. I've got no phobia against putting stuff in my Data folder for real.

 

@Augusta Calidia:

 

 

I did not realize that Wrye Bash has no install order capability.

 

Wrye Bash does indeed have install order capability. That's the entire point of the Installers tab - not just to install stuff, but also to control what order it's being installed in. It works in much the same way the Mods tab works to set load order in that regard.

[AugustaCalidia]

@matortheeternal

 

Both LOOT and Vortex serve a purpose in the community and are valuable pieces of software that have delivered meaningful results. However, one of their central design philosophies, "the user is stupid and cannot be trusted", is something that many people disagree with and find annoying.

 

"The user is stupid and cannot be trusted." What evidence do you have that this is one of the "central design philosophies" of both LOOT and Vortex? Do you have a smoking gun or two to show us?

 

In place of this rather sinister view of LOOT and Vortex, I would think it more likely that the developers' central design philosophy is to facilitate gamers in setting up and playing their games as quickly as possible. There is, of course, a small group of "advanced users" who enjoy tweaking and massaging their games as much or more as playing them. Most people, however, simply want to get on with playing their games and enjoying them.

 

EDIT

I got Matortheeternal's name wrong when I first posted this comment. After a good night's sleep I saw the error my ways and corrected it.

[AugustaCalidia]

@Arthmoor

 

 

Wrye Bash does indeed have install order capability. That's the entire point of the Installers tab - not just to install stuff, but also to control what order it's being installed in. It works in much the same way the Mods tab works to set load order in that regard.

 

Thank you for helping to clarify this. HadToRegister has already set me straight on the matter. Frankly I was quite surprised when one commentator said that Wrye Bash had no install order capability. Although I know very little about Wrye Bash, I had always assumed that it did have that capability.

[Arthmoor]

It didn't always have it, but it also got added something like 10 years ago back at the height of Oblivion's time.

 

More recent development versions are also getting FOMOD support added which should be quite useful to a lot of people.