Proper Rating Etiquette

I disagree with your rating system. In my eyes, 5 stars out of 5 stars means it is perfect. Flawless. Not improvable. If it's good but has a couple of bugs (particularly "easy" to fix ones), I would say 4 stars is perfectly reasonable.

I agree with your 1 and 2 star ratings, but I would rate the others like so:
3 stars (Decent or ok) - The mod works mostly. Perhaps it has some significant bugs, is low quality/poorly made, or just doesn't add anything of any particular value
4 stars (Good) - The mod works well. There might be some minor bugs, but overall the mod is pretty good quality. Perhaps there is something not too major that is missing that fits within the scope of the mod and would make the mod feel more complete
5 stars (Excellent) - The mod works perfectly. There are very few or no bugs at all (of course 0 bugs is practically impossible, so a few very minor bugs is acceptable). The mod is high quality and very well made. There is nothing major missing, everything the mod could reasonable include is available. Anything else would just be the cherry on top.

Just my 2 cents really. I feel like with many reviews (other sites like Amazon, not just BeamNG mods), 5 stars is given out way too easily. I often read 5 star reviews that read along the lines of "It's great, just wish it had xyz" or "It works really well. Would be good if they also xyz". To me that means it shouldn't actually be 5 stars, but 4.

 

I think that's actually a really good clarification to make.

 

Completely agree, although, given the WIP nature of most mods available, that makes the 5-star rating more or less redundant - even the best mods out there needed 3-4 extensive updates before they could really shine and reach their current near-flawless state.

At the other end of the spectrum, non-working mods worth the lowest score wouldn't simply pass repository checks.

Basically, all would come down to 3-star "flawed" mods and 4-star "good" mods, with the occasional 5-star gem.

I believe ratings would only make sense with some articulation. A mod might appear flawed only because it's held back by game limitations but still be pushing the boundaries - like, tracked vehicles right now, or most proof-of-concept mods. I think ratings should reflect that, concept, execution (and effort!) should all play a role in the final evaluation.

 

I agree with that statement. Anyways, I honestly think that people should be honest about their thoughts on the mod and I think they should give the author constructive criticism if the mod is flawed, so that way the author can improve on the mod and make it better.

 

Okay, I get it. I'm bumping a thread that's over a month old, but here's the thing. Everyone has different opinions. Mods that you think are perfect. Other people might they're just okay or outright bad and that's totally fine. Everybody has different opinions. There is no "proper rating" to give mods on here. Everybody gives their own reviews on them. Yes, rating a steakhouse 3 just because it's not a 5-star one is stupid, but everybody has their own opinions on things. That's just my take on this.