I'm unsure how genuine people are in general with their reviews, and I could see a lot of people intentionally giving poor reviews to bring others down to essentially get themselves on top. I'm not personally a fan of peer-reviewed contests like this for that reason, but I understand that it's practically impossible to experience every submission with a small number of judges.
I heard there were people who were going around and basically throwing people's submissions with bad ratings without even playing, or even people who were outright banned. It's not clear to me if those people had their ratings revoked. It might not have helped 100%, but also having a 5-10 minute timer before being able to rate after clicking download or play in browser could have mitigated this sort of behavior.
Additionally it would have been nice if there were comments attached to reviews, somewhat like what you see on Steam. You could get more context on why someone may have given it a lower rating in certain categories.
In general it's a little surprising how heavily certain areas were critiqued considering it's a short jam. Perfect game balance or robust polished AI isn't something that someone can realistically develop that quickly for instance. It's not fairly judged against very simple mechanics like multiple choice slideshows, so doing something other than very simple seems very punishing, which is rather discouraging for participating in a game jam in the future.
