Appworthy

METAL MADNESS PvP: Car Shooter

🎆Metal Madness🎆: furious online PvP car shooter.

ForgeGames Mobile
Get it onGoogle Play
Google Play rating3.5★80K ratings
PriceFreeIn-app purchases
Age9+Store age rating
CategoryGames
DeveloperForgeGames Mobile

What we found

Full report

Some warnings 5 users report having to pay to progress; 1 thing we found but could not confirm. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 400 reviews, the Android app’s code, the store listing and the privacy label.

Money

From our automated analysis, 25 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.

This analysis describes version 0.40.7 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-25 .

The store currently lists version 0.40.7, updated 2025-10-30.

Preview

Screenshot 1Screenshot 2Screenshot 3Screenshot 4Screenshot 5Screenshot 6Screenshot 7Screenshot 8

Store screenshots supplied by the developer.

About this app

🎆Metal Madness🎆: furious online PvP car shooter. Brand new 2025 action game packed with sniping, shooting, brawls and royal battles! Challenge fighters from all around the world. Post apocalyptic twisted tour over bullet arenas. Load the guns and dive into mad crossfire derby like a squad of special ops! We bring you game enhanced with machineguns, thrusters, bombs, flamethrowers, rockets and sniper rifles!🚨🚨🚨

🔥Loads of guns!🔫

Huge variety of military weapons to cross enemies out: flamethrower, rocket launchers, plasmagun, railgun, shotguns, machineguns, sniper rifles and more! It’s a pure mayhem on battlefield of steel knights and fighters! Mad firepower!…

From the developer’s store description.

For developers and the curious

The full report

The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.

Findings and evidence

1 published · 3 shown, not confirmed

Positives 1

Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.

Developer says data deletion can be requested

Measured

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

Sources
The store listing
Agreement
A measured fact from one deterministic, checkable source.
Where measured
From the Google Play listing
Definition

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 evidence

One source only — shown, not confirmed 3

Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.

Pay to progress

One source only

Pay to progress: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 80 reviews we read)

Sources
User reviews
Agreement
Only one kind of source so far. Shown, not counted.
Where measured
From Google Play reviews

This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.

Definition

Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.

Open evidence
How we know
Share and sample
1.3% of the 400 reviews read.

Trial terms not stated in the app's own text

One source only

Offers a free trial ("product is in free trial peroid?") with no renewal price, renewal date or auto-renew notice anywhere in the app's own text

Sources
The app's own on-screen text
Agreement
Only one kind of source so far. Shown, not counted.
Where measured
Found in the Android app’s package

This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.

Definition

The app's own screens offer a free trial without stating, beside it, what happens when the trial ends. Read this as context rather than as a charge: renewal terms are normally shown on the store's purchase sheet instead, which we cannot see, and we can only observe one kind of evidence for this — so it is shown, but never counted as a charge.

How we know

Package artefact

sha256:ada1f8efc855f4c796c2bef53f0cb226e42bc6ccff103fc079fbfc3c58732f56

Works offline

One source only

The app's own text says: "View the ad you saved when you were offline"

Sources
The app's own on-screen text
Agreement
Only one kind of source so far. Shown, not counted.
Where measured
Found in the Android app’s package

This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.

Definition

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.

How we know

Package artefact

sha256:ada1f8efc855f4c796c2bef53f0cb226e42bc6ccff103fc079fbfc3c58732f56

Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.

What reviewers report

400 reviews read · 1 review-based observation

400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.

Pay to progress

Shown, not confirmed

fun game that's nowhere near as p2w as many are saying. i've unlocked/leveled up all weapons & cars, except a couple, without spending $, free players can be competitive if willing to grind a bit.

5★ · Google Play · 2026-09-28

Another pay to win game. After about 1 week you will find yourself in matches completely outgunned unless you spend money to get ahead on equipment. Had a 90% win rate for the 1st 4 days and it went down from there. Absolutely horrible…

1★ · Google Play · 2025-02-25

another p2w micro transaction infested "game"

2★ · Google Play · 2025-12-06

A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.

Measurements

8 measured · 0 not assessed

“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.

From store data and reviews

Developer replies to reviews
Replies to at least 1 review in 20
Price in the store description
The store description doesn’t list prices (most don’t)
Cancelling, in the store description
The store description doesn’t say how to cancel (most don’t)
Themes reported by reviewers
1 theme reported
Counted from the reviews we have read for this app. "No theme reported" means no theme reached our reporting threshold — it is not a finding that nothing is wrong with this app, and we do not say it is.
Five-star share of ratings
Under 65% five-star
Arithmetic on the stores' own published rating counts. It says nothing about why the ratings fall where they do.

In the app package we scanned

Android package 0.40.7, scanned 25 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.

Sensitive permissions
None requested
Counted against a fixed list of eighteen sensitive Android permissions: sixteen runtime permissions, among them location, camera, microphone, contacts and SMS, and two the user must switch on in system settings, drawing over other apps and usage access. Requesting one is not itself a finding.
Analytics or tracking SDKs in the scanned package
1–2 found
Advertising SDKs in the scanned package
1–2 found
Counted as distinct SDKs in the package we scanned. One mediation bundle can contribute several, so this is not a count of advertisers.
How we know

Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured

Versions and dates analysed

Assessed 25 Oct 2026

This analysis describes version 0.40.7 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-25 .

The store currently lists version 0.40.7, updated 2025-10-30.

Store update history

Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.

Google Play

Version 0.40.7 · 2025-10-30

No release notes were provided for this version.

Assessment record

Status
Automated analysis
App identifier
metal-madness-pvp
Assessment date
25 Oct 2026
Sources used
6 independent signals: 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
Reviews read
400
Package examined
Android · 0.40.7 · scanned 25 Oct 2026
Human inspection
Not completed

Assessed 2026-10-25 from 400 user reviews, the app's package, the store listing and its privacy label.

How we know
Measurement vocabulary
1.4

How this page was produced

Analyzed 2026-10-25 Version analyzed: 0.40.76 independent signals400 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: 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.

Store facts

Google Play

What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.

Google Play

Store rating
3.49 ★ · 80,030 ratings
Version
0.40.7
Updated
30 Oct 2025
Price
Free · In-app purchases
Age rating
9+
Size
Not supplied
Open in Google Play
Developer
ForgeGames Mobile
Category
Games
Listing price
Free · In-app purchases

Purchases the store lists

 What this app sells
Google Play doesn’t publish per-purchase prices.

Method and limits

What this report can and cannot show

How the automated analysis works

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.

Limits of this report

  • A package scan is static. It identifies code and text in one Android build. It does not measure a live ad session, test a deletion request, or count the steps needed to cancel.
  • Reviews keep their sample. A review-only charge shows distinct reviewers, the share and the sample size, and is published only once it clears that label’s published threshold. Calibration labels are machine-drafted and not yet confirmed by a person.
  • Not assessed is a state. It is never a zero and never a pass.
  • A missing label is not a clean bill of health. It means the evidence did not support one, not that the app is problem-free.
Not yet human-reviewed. A hands-on test can confirm or contradict a finding and adds its own measurements; it does not change a measurement row. Hands-on inspections are not yet open.
Review thresholds Read the methodology For developers

Request a correction

[email protected]

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.

Report a factual error — free Email a correction