Your bet on a two-player game ultimately paid off, earning you not only second place overall, but also the RB award. The gameplay and theme are in line with the assignment “What could possibly go wrong,” and you managed to include enough varied activities that influence the outcome of the game, such as QTEs and special items. As a result, even though it might seem that the saboteur would have the upper hand, that is not the case. I think you lost a few points because the game does not include any truly original core element, but instead feels “only” like a well-crafted product.
There is not much to criticize in terms of execution. Your game looks great, with a consistent visual style and even details such as unique particle effects for damaged objects, a passing landscape that visibly does not repeat, and so on. I also did not notice anything that failed to work or prevented the game from being playable.
Your presentation was excellent. It contained everything it was supposed to, and on top of that, it had a nice visual style consistent with the game. In this case, the jury’s evaluation clearly reflects that you were able to present and sell your game well, which certainly cannot be said of all teams.
As a team, you worked well, although at the beginning, before you agreed on the concept, things were a bit shaky. Your safe bet ultimately paid off, but I would like to see some of your other ideas developed someday as well. During development, and especially during game jams, make sure to keep an eye on proper task prioritization so that, ideally, everyone can work in parallel and no one has to wait too long for someone else.