Why on Earth should we be earning AP for games that we play for fun? There's enough ways to earn AP. Also, by earning AP for completing games, you're just telling users: "the only reason you should finish the game is to earn some useless points (AP)!" -- forget enjoying the website for what it is, or even giving quality feedback to authors.
I don't play for fun most of the time since I don't enjoy most of the games. Curiosity is a larger factor.
So I'm saying, "The only reason you should finish a game that you don't like is to have a better of understanding of a game to give some quality feedback." (unless it's just too hard to continue with the game.) I wouldn't mind getting an extra bonus. But I don't want to deal with the extra load time, extra caching, extra anything that takes more time from me and the game, especially if it means extra points. I don't want to be compensated for "waiting".
But in other words: I don't play for fun but mostly curiosity. Completing a game is just beyond the fun. It adds perspective. Earning points for it, sure that'd be nice, but spending your time experiencing a creator's work might just be worth it. Perceptions can change as a game is completed.
Example: I didn't like Phage Wars, which was rather slow. I beat it with one species. But I realized it locks out any species you used to dominate. So I was interested. And continued until I beat it with every single species, (That's 4 hours not consecutive. 30 minutes per species.) to find out what happens at the end. Only to find out there was no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. It automatically resets! *headdesk* I want some points for that! [/rhetorical] but I haven't written a comment for it yet. 4 hours.
So I go on with this already insanely long post on a slightly different topic.
Just try to earn merits
Merits aren't worth more if they are of a better quality. Playing a game depending on length/difficulty and whatnot was proposed to be on a sliding scale of quality, so it's incomparable. I have merits that I am proud of, merits I am not proud of, non-merits I am even more proud of the merits I am proud of, but the merits are all worth the same and non-merits are all worth the same. If I beat a particularly long and difficult game and get a bunch of points, or some short, inane game, and get zero or one points, then I'd agree with it.
And I go on to another problem with earning points for beating games, but although it touches tangentially, I will not going into the achievements idea (and this ties in closely with achievements) which has been knocked down so many times before.
Another problem I have with this idea, what does the first person who beats it get? I mean there are walkthroughs and guides giving out answers to point-and-clicks. Those aren't hard to follow and aren't hard to beat. So the first person who figures it out gets as much as a person who follows a guide? It's hardly fair.
