I'm still interested in these contests, but I also have other things to do that sometimes have to take priority. I have projects started for a couple of the past contests that I had to interrupt work on because of more pressing concerns, without getting far enough that there'd be any point to releasing an unfinished version. I understand what you're saying about possibly giving good scores to unfinished entries, but I think that such entries only have any potential when they're from a genre where the development is very vertical rather than horizontal, which my maps never are.
To explain what I mean by that...
Take a typical RPG, which I would consider to have a vertical development structure. When designing an RPG, you might start out with a few basic triggers to handle some general happenings (like item use, etc.), but most of the development goes into creating different areas in which the few general systems can be applied-- the chapters, if you will, of the RPG's story. Now, with a map like that, you have something to play as soon as you create the general triggers and the first bit of space to walk around...there might only be a few seconds of gameplay, to be sure, but at least there is some.
Now think about a very simple, triggered-projectile-type arena map. Instead of a few basic systems for the RPG, you need to have ways of handling aiming, the projectile's motion, the damage dealt by the projectile, and so on, and until all of those systems are in, there's nothing that the player can do except try and judge the map-maker's assurances that there will be gameplay when it is finished. After the game is playable, though, it's nearly done, unless you want to add additional weapons or what have you. This is what I would call a horizontal development structure.
Furthermore, some maps wind up being artificially horizontal because of the design process. Still considering the projectile map, suppose there are six types of weapons instead of one. Now, it might well be the case that there are some general systems-- dying, losing, etc.-- that it makes the most sense to put in at the end, because testing is much simpler without them. As a result, if you don't get the full time that you expected, the map will be unplayable, even though there was still enough time to make it playable, if some of the features that it made sense to develop earlier had been excluded.
The result of this is that you might have two maps that will take the exact same amount of time to develop to completion, and two map-makers who each spend an equal amount of time, getting each map to, say, 90% completion, and wind up with two "unfinished projects", one of which is nearly 90% playable, and the other of which is 0% playable. So inviting people to submit unfinished projects is all well and good, but don't expect it to make much difference if the people are working on something that requires horizontal development.
Since I have very little interest in either making or playing the typical kinds of map that are most suitable for vertical development (such as RPGs), if I'm interrupted by work or life and have to reallocate my time, you're not going to get a submission from me that round. But I
have been working on things for the contests, and who knows how many others are in the same situation? I think the best thing to do would be to keep the contests up, and maybe there will be times when enough of the participants do have the opportunity to submit something to get some competition going.
None.