I my first playtrough Civ VI I've finished with cultural victory around year 2000 and to be honest it was a close one - I had to attack and conquer Russia, that was close to achieving it before me. While I don't remember my exact final score, in the leaders Hall of Fame I was at about 8-9th place.

In the second playtrough I've won around year 1920, again with cultural victory. This time my country was leading in all fields and (if I'd want to) I could achieve the domination victory many rounds earlier. Yet this time my score was much lower and in the Hall of Fame I've landed on 16th place.

Does it mean that longer game would always bring a higher score? It would be more logical if a quicker victory would rank you higher, not lower.

Both games were played on the same difficulty levels

I my first playtrough Civ VI I've finished with cultural victory around year 2000 and to be honest it was a close one - I had to attack and conquer Russia, that was close to achieving it before me. While I don't remember my exact final score, in the leaders Hall of Fame I was at about 8-9th place.

In the second playtrough I've won around year 1920, again with cultural victory. This time my country was leading in all fields and (if I'd want to) I could achieve the domination victory many rounds earlier. Yet this time my score was much lower and in the Hall of Fame I've landed on 16th place.

Does it mean that longer game would always bring a higher score? It would be more logical if a quicker victory would rank you higher, not lower.

Both games were played on the same difficulty levels

To clarify: in example if I can achieve a victory in one round (i.e. only one city to conquer) but I'd instead wait few more rounds gathering culture, science etc, before conquering the final city, will my score be lower or higher?