请问创意小游戏的评审流程可否更公开透明一些

AI助手支持GPT4.0

It was rejected twice in a row, during which optimization was carried out for 3 months. The reason for the two times is: Based on the traditional playing method, there is no outstanding innovation in the playing method. It's not that I'm particularly confident about how well we've done. It's just that I've been waiting for two months for the results to be cool. We are a team that uses love to generate electricity. We yearn for creativity and work hard for it. As a result, we wait for two fixed words to prevaricate. There should be at least one convincing feedback. What are the comments of the jury and the score of the public review. These feedback can help developers to better understand their own positioning, and can also help developers to improve. Even I suspect that there is no chance of a public review.. If all the evaluation rights are in the hands of the judges, can fairness be guaranteed? According to this reason, how many of the games that have been rated as creative are not based on traditional methods of playing?

回答：