Some warnings 1 confirmed warning, and users report 1 more thing. Checked: 400 reviews, the Android app’s code, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 3.98 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 3.99, updated 2026-10-07.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
What is ‘Game of Dice’?
▣ Is This a Board Game or a Card Game?
- A board game like no other!
- Create your own strategy on the board with Dice and Skills!
- Play strategically to increase your territory and toll.
- Bankrupt opponents to win!
▣ Tons of Rewards and Awesome Benefits!
- Just log in for 2,000 Gems~
- 100 Free Draw Ticket for new Duelists as well!
- No more worrying about items! A Play Box with Gems, Gold, and Skills!
▣ Real-Time PvP Matches With Duelists Around the World!
- Duelists around the world, gather round~
- The board game for everyone that captured the heart of 50 million players!
- Compete with friends around the world through seasonal rankings and tournaments.
▣ Colorful Animation Dice!
- Robot Dice, Panda Dice, Devil Dice...…
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 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 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:f0430436ddac5ee3623b35e54c75b52f7f438faa90965374fb0445960fd893c5Specific 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.
The app's own text says: "Watch the entire video to claim your reward"
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Package artefact
sha256:f0430436ddac5ee3623b35e54c75b52f7f438faa90965374fb0445960fd893c5Pay to progress: raised by 33 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 12 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
The app's own text says: "Please press "Continue" if you choose to start using our app."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own screens offer a way past sign-up — guest access, skipping, or browsing before registering — rather than gating the product behind an account. The store's privacy disclosure is checked alongside it: that disclosure is self-reported, so it corroborates this credit rather than establishing it.
Package artefact
sha256:f0430436ddac5ee3623b35e54c75b52f7f438faa90965374fb0445960fd893c5The app's own text says: "Open ad when you're back online."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own copy describes working without a connection — offline mode, downloading for offline use, or content saved for later. Shown because readers filter on it; it is a feature, not a fairness property, and never counts for or against an app.
Package artefact
sha256:f0430436ddac5ee3623b35e54c75b52f7f438faa90965374fb0445960fd893c5400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
I am changing my review from 5 stars to 1 star. I loved this game when it came out. It was fair, and every player had a fair shot of winning. Now, it is literally paid to win weather. Is it skill cards that just literally win the game for…
Stop harassing for reviews and stop with your pay to win model (still giving a 1)
It's awesome,especially the characters.They give out the feeling from the players who play this game.Wish Joycity can upgrade it's performance.Thanks JOYCITY!!! Edit: I want to retract my statement before. Your product sucks. You only…
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 3.98, scanned 27 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 3.98 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 3.99, updated 2026-10-07.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
No release notes were provided for this version.
game-of-diceAssessed 2026-10-27 from 400 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.
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 subscription bills weekly; 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.