Vortex 1.0 Release

[HadToRegister]

i've never actually figured the reasons for that out.

if i don't use a product/company/whatever, i see no need for me to spend my time telling people that i don't like/use whatever it is i don't use.

however, if you removed all that from the internet, it would be a much smaller place.

anyway, it's very odd.

:smile:

 

 

It's like standing out front of a movie theater with a megaphone telling everybody the Movie sucks, but you haven't seen it.

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #72448278. #72455973 is also a reply to the same post.

1ae0bfb8 wrote:

 

In response to post #72419883. #72430168, #72436683 are all replies on the same post.

Zanderat wrote: Wow. Maybe I should not be extending the life of this argument. But................

I simply don't get the it. As an experiment, I made a clean game profile. Installed a smallish amount of mods, around 30. I turned off auto sort. And then proceeded to use Vorteex's drag and drop option to order the plugins. Because auto sort is turned off, Vortex/LOOT won't mess with your load order. Isn't that what the Arthmoor's of the world want? Maybe I am missing the point, but this seems like much fuss over nothing.

Arthmoor wrote: You are somewhat missing the point, yes. In order to get what you describe, you have to disable the autosort. Which means you'd have to go back to the way actual mod managers handle things and run LOOT externally to get that benefit, but the problem is that you're still generating rules for what you're asking of it when it would have been simpler to just stick to the standards the community has established and offer a proper drag & drop without compromising the integration with LOOT. If other programs can do this, surely Vortex can too? Unless of course, as the developers say, they've set out to change the standard for the sake of changing the standard. Which is something I'd expect out of Microsoft, not a mod installer.

Augusta Calidia wrote: Where have the Vortex developers ever said that they've "set out to change the standard for the sake of changing the standard?" Or are you simply speaking hypothetically?

Where have the Vortex developers ever said that they've "set out to change the standard for the sake of changing the standard?" Or are you simply speaking hypothetically?

Nowhere. It's made up.

 

this saddens me, a lot.

i really don't get the point of doing that. the internet is truly a weird place sometimes.

Arthmoor wrote: Nobody made anything up. Go read the Vortex forums and Tannin's own statements on this. You'll find the only one making things up is Dark0ne trying to cover up the truth of what his own team has been saying.

You can't quote it, because there is no quote. It's made up.

Provide the proof to back up your claim or stop this incessant moaning. It's boring.

If you continue to make these silly unfounded claims/lies without providing proof then your messages will simply be removed. I've humoured your moaning long enough. Edited August 10, 2019 by Dark0ne

[DSPiron]

In response to post #72457373.

Augusta Calidia wrote: This celebration of Vortex has devolved into a totally unnecessary fight between those who want to play games and those who want to play load order. There's room for both in the big, beautiful modding universe. Can't we just agree to disagree and get on with our lives?

Both sides are rather dismissive about the other, think that their method is better while the other shouldn't be used, and share the same site.
People who use Vortex to sort will eventually use mods from people who feel mods should be manually sorted, and vice versa.

One side feels that LOOT's issues can be handled by a user making new rules there.
Another feels that LOOT's issues are intrinsic, and need to be handled afterwards.

One side feels manual sorting, and drag-and-drop sorting have been in Vortex awhile.
Another feels manual sorting and drag-and-drop are not in Vortex and never will be.

One side just wants to play the game, and not mess with the load order more than needed.
Another just wants to play the game, and knows that a good load order isn't made by LOOT.

And I could be completely wrong on all that. *shrug*

[Guest deleted34304850]

again, having read what you have written, i cannot agree with any of it.

 

i do not exist on a "side", vortex is one of several tools that can be used to perform a specific function. i endevor to understand the reasons why language like "proper" is used when there seems to be no standard in place to define "proper", so it becomes an opinion. opinions quickly become entrenched.

 

i think this is what this discussion has touched on.

 

what i have seen is that several fallacies have been peddled in this thread, and very rapidly shot down. this is a good thing. fallacy has no place in debate.

 

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager. i have seen strongly defended opinions on that - but evidence > opinion.

 

the vortex support forums are rife with people offering their opinion, based on zero, or little usage, telling others who developed the tool, or who use the tool extensively that vortex is broken, or doesn't work, or does it wrong. when asked to provide evidence of said issues, so that the program can be made better, the vast majority have offered nothing, or it's been user error.

 

i'm seeing the same in this discussion.

 

zero actual evidence of vortex breaking games, breaking mods, breaking everything including breaking standards.

 

by the way, if someone can point me to a set of established standards pertaining to modding, especially modding bethesda games, standards that have been ratified by bethesda, and some other accredited independent forum, then i'd appreciate it. if we're talking standards then they exist, right, and that would be all the definitive proof there is of whether vortex is a "proper" mod manager, or not - and so too every other mod manager out there that has ever existed since the dawn of the first mod.

[HadToRegister]

The major problem is, one "Side" is acting like they have no choice but to use Vortex and nothing else, and are endlessly caterwauling about it as if they cannot continue to use NMM, MO, MO2 and be on their way.
Instead of being happy with the THREE mod managers they have where they can do their micromanaging of manual plugin load order, they want to complain endlessly about Vortex instead.
I don't get it.
If the mod managers you use are so much better than Vortex, then why are those people the ones constantly complaining about Vortex instead of modding their games with the other mod managers and manually sorting their load orders and playing?

People go out of their way to stop in the Vortex Support group and tell us how they will NEVER use Vortex, as if anybody actually cares.
Again, that's also like standing in front of a movie theater and telling anybody who will listen, "I'm not going to go see this movie, I just wanted you to know"

[Arthmoor]

In response to post #72459278.

1ae0bfb8 wrote:

again, having read what you have written, i cannot agree with any of it.

 

i do not exist on a "side", vortex is one of several tools that can be used to perform a specific function. i endevor to understand the reasons why language like "proper" is used when there seems to be no standard in place to define "proper", so it becomes an opinion. opinions quickly become entrenched.

 

i think this is what this discussion has touched on.

 

what i have seen is that several fallacies have been peddled in this thread, and very rapidly shot down. this is a good thing. fallacy has no place in debate.

 

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager. i have seen strongly defended opinions on that - but evidence > opinion.

 

the vortex support forums are rife with people offering their opinion, based on zero, or little usage, telling others who developed the tool, or who use the tool extensively that vortex is broken, or doesn't work, or does it wrong. when asked to provide evidence of said issues, so that the program can be made better, the vast majority have offered nothing, or it's been user error.

 

i'm seeing the same in this discussion.

 

zero actual evidence of vortex breaking games, breaking mods, breaking everything including breaking standards.

 

by the way, if someone can point me to a set of established standards pertaining to modding, especially modding bethesda games, standards that have been ratified by bethesda, and some other accredited independent forum, then i'd appreciate it. if we're talking standards then they exist, right, and that would be all the definitive proof there is of whether vortex is a "proper" mod manager, or not - and so too every other mod manager out there that has ever existed since the dawn of the first mod.

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager.

Oh, but you have, you are simply choosing to selectively ignore it when people tell you exactly what they mean by this and define it in clear and unambiguous terms.

That's not a failure of evidence. It's a failure to accept it.

[HadToRegister]

 

In response to post #72459278.

 

 

 

1ae0bfb8 wrote:

again, having read what you have written, i cannot agree with any of it.

i do not exist on a "side", vortex is one of several tools that can be used to perform a specific function. i endevor to understand the reasons why language like "proper" is used when there seems to be no standard in place to define "proper", so it becomes an opinion. opinions quickly become entrenched.

i think this is what this discussion has touched on.

what i have seen is that several fallacies have been peddled in this thread, and very rapidly shot down. this is a good thing. fallacy has no place in debate.

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager. i have seen strongly defended opinions on that - but evidence > opinion.

the vortex support forums are rife with people offering their opinion, based on zero, or little usage, telling others who developed the tool, or who use the tool extensively that vortex is broken, or doesn't work, or does it wrong. when asked to provide evidence of said issues, so that the program can be made better, the vast majority have offered nothing, or it's been user error.

i'm seeing the same in this discussion.

zero actual evidence of vortex breaking games, breaking mods, breaking everything including breaking standards.

by the way, if someone can point me to a set of established standards pertaining to modding, especially modding bethesda games, standards that have been ratified by bethesda, and some other accredited independent forum, then i'd appreciate it. if we're talking standards then they exist, right, and that would be all the definitive proof there is of whether vortex is a "proper" mod manager, or not - and so too every other mod manager out there that has ever existed since the dawn of the first mod.

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager.

Oh, but you have, you are simply choosing to selectively ignore it when people tell you exactly what they mean by this and define it in clear and unambiguous terms.

 

That's not a failure of evidence. It's a failure to accept it.

 

 

 

Why don't you provide, as 1ae0bfb8 requested, a link/citation to his request

 

by the way, if someone can point me to a set of established standards pertaining to modding, especially modding bethesda games, standards that have been ratified by bethesda, and some other accredited independent forum, then i'd appreciate it. if we're talking standards then they exist, right, and that would be all the definitive proof there is of whether vortex is a "proper" mod manager, or not - and so too every other mod manager out there that has ever existed since the dawn of the first mod.

 

Because right now, it's YOU who are declaring it's not a proper mod manager while selectively ignoring otherwise.

So, show us the documentation that defines a "Proper Mod Manager", or is the definition "Proper Mod Manager", what I suspect, is only YOUR OPINION?

 

[Guest deleted34304850]

 

In response to post #72459278.

 

 

 

1ae0bfb8 wrote:

again, having read what you have written, i cannot agree with any of it.

i do not exist on a "side", vortex is one of several tools that can be used to perform a specific function. i endevor to understand the reasons why language like "proper" is used when there seems to be no standard in place to define "proper", so it becomes an opinion. opinions quickly become entrenched.

i think this is what this discussion has touched on.

what i have seen is that several fallacies have been peddled in this thread, and very rapidly shot down. this is a good thing. fallacy has no place in debate.

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager. i have seen strongly defended opinions on that - but evidence > opinion.

the vortex support forums are rife with people offering their opinion, based on zero, or little usage, telling others who developed the tool, or who use the tool extensively that vortex is broken, or doesn't work, or does it wrong. when asked to provide evidence of said issues, so that the program can be made better, the vast majority have offered nothing, or it's been user error.

i'm seeing the same in this discussion.

zero actual evidence of vortex breaking games, breaking mods, breaking everything including breaking standards.

by the way, if someone can point me to a set of established standards pertaining to modding, especially modding bethesda games, standards that have been ratified by bethesda, and some other accredited independent forum, then i'd appreciate it. if we're talking standards then they exist, right, and that would be all the definitive proof there is of whether vortex is a "proper" mod manager, or not - and so too every other mod manager out there that has ever existed since the dawn of the first mod.

i am yet to see any factual, hard evidence that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager.

Oh, but you have, you are simply choosing to selectively ignore it when people tell you exactly what they mean by this and define it in clear and unambiguous terms.

 

That's not a failure of evidence. It's a failure to accept it.

 

i can only go on my own experience, and i am being entirely honest with you when i say that i have not seen any evidence that tells me that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager and i have to put "proper" in place like that because it is not my terminology.

my test is this; keeping it simple;

does vortex install a mod into a game i choose correctly. the answer is yes.

what i don't say is - does it install a mod into a game i choose using a method i choose. the method is secondary to my requirement. i think that's where the argument exists, which is not where i am focussed.

my own very simple test shows me that if i follow the rules vortex expects, just as if i follow the rules for nmm/mo/mo2 etc., i can achieve what i want without issue.

 

i am not going to drop into the rabbit hole of semantics, because, i don't need to do that. obviously i speak for myself and only myself and i have no problem with other people coming to different conclusions, but, i like evidence. 30 years in IT trained me to ask for and expect evidence. not opinion, not fallacy, not "i don't like it", just very simple evidence.

i keep reading the forums, and the git hub pages and i read when bugs are solved - exactly as i do with the ufo4p team and their bug tracker - its how my mind works. please don't think i am accusing people of wrong doing, i am not, i am coming to my own conclusions, nothing more than that.

[DSPiron]

-...wow, the Nexus boards really don't like people jumping back and forth, snip-

i can only go on my own experience, and i am being entirely honest with you when i say that i have not seen any evidence that tells me that vortex is not a "proper" mod manager and i have to put "proper" in place like that because it is not my terminology.

my test is this; keeping it simple;

does vortex install a mod into a game i choose correctly. the answer is yes.

what i don't say is - does it install a mod into a game i choose using a method i choose. the method is secondary to my requirement. i think that's where the argument exists, which is not where i am focussed.

my own very simple test shows me that if i follow the rules vortex expects, just as if i follow the rules for nmm/mo/mo2 etc., i can achieve what i want without issue.

i am not going to drop into the rabbit hole of semantics, because, i don't need to do that. obviously i speak for myself and only myself and i have no problem with other people coming to different conclusions, but, i like evidence. 30 years in IT trained me to ask for and expect evidence. not opinion, not fallacy, not "i don't like it", just very simple evidence.

i keep reading the forums, and the git hub pages and i read when bugs are solved - exactly as i do with the ufo4p team and their bug tracker - its how my mind works. please don't think i am accusing people of wrong doing, i am not, i am coming to my own conclusions, nothing more than that.

Using your definition, no mod managers install mods correctly. At least, none that are for Bethesda games.

No mod manager is able to put the mod into the correct spot in the load order. Vortex is the closest, but it will inevitably go wrong as sorting a load order can't be done automatically.

Your definition for any Bethesda game mod manager should be "Does [mod manager in question] install a mod's files into a game I choose correctly, and allow me to correctly place it's 'plugins' in the load order"

Vortex technically passes, but it's by forcing it to do something it's not intended.

 

If you haven't seen the evidence then you must be blind. There are plenty of people whose load orders aren't sorted properly by Vortex, and can't be sorted.

As someone with 30 years in IT, you should know that this quantity of issues signify a serious issue with the program.

That's your evidence that no amount of modifications, no amount of rules, will ensure LOOT can sort properly.

Edited August 10, 2019 by DSPiron

[Guest deleted34304850]

hi,

i'm not even talking about load order, that should be clear as i haven't mentioned it. i specifically said - keep it simple can i install a mod if i set up the mod manager correctly.

load order comes later. that may be a big deal to you and everyone else, but it's a different topic.

i used nmm, vortex and mo2 on my system to take a very simple mod - actually, it was ufo4p, and install it in my fallout 4 game.

i don't test for load order - i test for - did it put the files in the correct place, assuming that i set up the mod manager correctly each time. the answer was, yes, each one of them installed the mod correctly. all the files were in the correct directory after installation.

that is a mod manager.

load order is an entirely different topic that i have not mentioned in my testing.

previously, i have used loot & nmm, loot & mo2 and even done manual manipulation of my loadorder.txt file. vortex negates any need for me to perform that extra step - but the other mod managers do require it, which means that my very simple test would be invalidated because vortex is doing extra steps that the others cannot do, which is why, until this reply, i have not once, mentioned load order.

i'm just trying to validate "proper" based on my own very simple test of - can i install a mod, yes or no.

the answer is - yes.

 

by the way - i assume you have empirical data to back this chunk of gubbins up?

 

 

There are plenty of people whose load orders aren't sorted properly by Vortex, and can't be sorted.

Also, as has been discussed so many times by so many people in the vortex forums and in this thread, vortex allows people to MANUALLY ovderride what it gives you as a load order in several different ways, including drag/drop, so I don't even know what argument you're having, or with whom.

 

Not blind, but can read. You should try it sometime.

Edited August 10, 2019 by 1ae0bfb8