No rating is going to identify the best VRCHAT spots, as some will be more visited than others. A place with 4 stars and 1000 visits will potentially be better than one with 5 stars and 2 visits. Furthermore, people tend to group together in certain places... and that is perhaps a social issue that goes far beyond this forum. In Twinity it worked perfectly to identify the least interesting places and to motivate the creators, which should be the achievable objetive.

-------- In spanish -----

En mi experiencia ninguna calificación va a funcionar para identificar las mejores creaciones, pero el sistema de estrellas/ nº de visitas se demostró útil para identificar los menos interesantes y fue una buena forma de motivar a los creadores... lo cual en el fondo es el objetivo buscado.

Twinity, for no few the best virtual world ever created... and possibly the worst maintained too ;-) had a 5 stars system and it worked perfectly fine. If sometimes you have to load heavy places only to find something uninteresting... in the end may not be worth traveling anymore. In Twinity this 5 star system worked perfectly and I never heard anything against it, and creators wanted to improve their places for this. There was no additional qualifying text, but has something much better... A "GUEST BOOK" where everyone could leave their opinion, compliments, greetings to the creator.

---------- In spanish: -----------

Twinity tenía un rango de 5 estrellas que funcionaba estupendamente y alentaba a los creadores a mejorar. Y aún mejor, tenía un "LIBRO DE INVITADOS" donde se le dejaban cumplidos, mensajes o saludos a los creadores.

I sure look forward to getting 1 star reviews from users with avatars that break for completely undetectable reasons, or who get 5 fps on their Quest because its SSD memory is full and only has 12 Kb of free space left.

I fully agree and I also think it should be mandatory for both worlds and groups when it comes to Creator Economy, maybe even with comments. Because in this case it's already a marketplace with values, where the institution of reputation plays an important role. It's hard to imagine a marketplace without the ability to rate the product.

So, it might be simple like/dislike for regular worlds, and classic 5⭐-system with comments for "p2w" worlds.

Nice Idea 10/10

As an avid world-hopper (I go through hundreds of worlds in Labs to find the hidden gems), the current system sucks, since the system is basically time spent in world+favorites being the only indicators of quality. I have to delete old favorites to be able to show people some love for their new creations, and some of those old gems I don't want to lose. On the flip side, worlds that have obnoxious effects, trolling worlds, are horrifically unoptimized, etc - have no way to indicate such. They still got a visit count from my hop, and sometimes, they're just bad and not worth reporting (but not worth visiting either).

Having gone through "Labs-hell" myself, having to ask friends to spend time with me in and favorite my world to get it actually Public (and able to be saved as a Home; why can't you Home a Labs world anyway?) weeks later was super irritating. It doesn't help that this system is basically slated so only world creators who have external communities like Discords already can shoot through Labs within hours, while if you've fallen off the few first scrolls of Labs as someone unestablished in the space - good luck.

I support a star rating system, and optional (very limited character) review system. I also think it should be limited to Trusted Users only, as the chances of a Trusted User review-bombing is slim and would reduce the chances of bot swarms.

Suggested tags would be amazing (hangout, games, TV, photography, landscape/exploration, etc) too but keywords could be pulled from reviews instead - some worlds are beautiful for taking photos, but don't have much else going on to keep someone there for hours. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but the current time-spent system doesn't support these people getting the exposure they deserve for their efforts.

I love that more than six years later, there's basically now a massive garbage heap of worlds out there and no internal solution exists that allows the cream to rise to the top. I guess until VRChat does it's thing, support websites that permits reviews/ratings of worlds and tries to spotlight good world creators to help correct the imbalance of high quality content to "new single box world first upload [WIP] more to come" locations.

Best if “ Like “ be the only thing be on the option viewable by the public.

If the world has the ability to be like or disliked then the author would need the ability to see those likes and dislikes too from the users who rate them

And perhaps forced to have to leave comments as to why they dislike while those that do like can leave with a like or comments

not a possibility because bots are a thing with vrchat osc, and they would spam the like button on most worlds anyways showing that the system you explained can be abused. people use the vote to kick function only to have a ton of bots join and vote to kick making it even more annoying. yes thats still a issue apparently.

This as I've explained will be a huge problem if there is a world ranking system.

It can be heavily abused all they would need to do is make a ton of usable emails set each email to a new vrchat account and then down or up rank the world itself. its explained that easy. I've met players who use alt accounts as well so its still a possibility this system will and can be abused.

I might add:

Either "Like" or "Dislike" makes more sense and usable data than a nebulous subjective scale of 1-10 or 1-5 stars.

Being able to review worlds would be THE MOST useful to everyone involved. Think like Steam game reviews and/or literal reviews of google maps for real world locations.