Serious warnings 2 confirmed warnings, and users report 1 more thing. Checked: 363 reviews, the Android app’s code, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 30 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.4.9 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 1.4.9, updated 2026-08-19.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Moto bike race : 3xm game drives you through a whole new experience with the most extreme bike races ever.
Moto bike race : 3xm game brings to players the latest-updated engine, stunning 3D graphics, fast-furious spins ride and the most awesome motorbikes that you can never inmagine. You could check realistic driving sensations and make the incredible stunt. All motorbikes have been reproduced on the basis of real life engines, all details have been taken care of. Specially, crash is excluded from the game so you will not be disrupted from enjoying your time with our game.
Moto bike race : 3xm game contains:
- Multi language selection:
Multi-language option is available for the best gaming experience. Don't worry, we speak the same language.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Bundles 7 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, Google Mobile Ads (AdMob / Ad Manager), Meta Audience Network and 3 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:c1728664873d7ce3dc32fc3c61a85aebff9547314257062577754122fa3b4ee8Aggressive ad load: raised by 22 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 17 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Misleading advertising: raised by 11 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 33 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Reviewers repeatedly report that the app is not what its advertising showed. We never see the ad creative itself, so nothing we collect can corroborate or refute this — it is published as an attributed user report: what reviewers say, and how many of them said it.
363 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
cant even get to second race because it keeps sending me to install tictok and other apps i dont want. pretty much an un-playable game with wwwaaaayyyy too much advertising. i dont really know about the play because it wont let me play…
a bit to many ads and to short levels
too many ads. use ads for rewards, not just because you completed a level. that makes this a playable ad engine, not a game.
Another misleading game. The game looks nothing like the ad. Don't waste your time.
Zero stars for lying.People look at the pictures on this page,that is how the game really is BUT the ad is misleading.It's bad enough that if we decide that we won't be manipulated to pay to remove ads for mediocre games we have to watch…
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 1.4.9, scanned 25 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.4.9 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 1.4.9, updated 2026-08-19.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
- We've updated the game to fix some crashes and make features more stability.
No release notes were provided for this version.
bike-3xmAssessed 2026-10-30 from 363 user reviews, the app's package, the store listing and its privacy label.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
No itemized purchase list is available for this listing.
This assessment is produced automatically. Six independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.