Play as the Gabbit with odditude, Munch, and his side-kick, Abe, as they lead…
Oddworld Inhabitants IncToo little checked to say Only 400 reviews read, too few to say.
From our automated analysis, 26 Oct 2026.
This analysis describes version 1.0.7 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.7, updated 2023-04-18.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Play as the Gabbit with odditude, Munch, and his side-kick, Abe, as they lead a revolution against the conniving, corporate clods of Oddworld. Munch has been captured, poked, probed and generally violated by the greedy corporate sickos, the Vickers, and now it's time for him and Abe to turn the tables. Power up with Vendo Machines, use psychic powers to possess enemies and machines, arm yourself with oddball Vendo weapons, and rally Oddworld's wacked-out inhabitants (via GameSpeak) to stick it to the Vickers and save the day. C'mon. The fate of Oddworld is in your hands.
** PLEASE NOTE: Broadcom and Amlogic devices NOT SUPPORTED! Older Rockchip may not support video playback. Requires at least a 1.2 GHz dual core CPU, 1 GB RAM with Adreno 220, Nvidia Tegra 3, ARM Mali 400-MP, PowerVR SGX 543MP, Intel HD Graphics or Vivante GC1000 GPU.
First time on Mobile!…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Reviewers report clear pricing: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 80 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own text offers a one-time or lifetime purchase, or reviewers report that the price is stated clearly.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Fun and challenging! Like what mobile games should be, one time purchase and haha with some depth, none of this micro transactions and inability to others without them
So far (I'm at the big well) it's awesome, like all of the oddworld mobile games. A step or two above normal mobile standards. Feels like a console game, maybe PS3. Fantastic graphics, full story, real game with no in-app purchases. I…
I have loved this game since its inception.. I'm tired of games that keep wanting money and accidental large in-app purchases, which I can't have refunded and can ill afford. I'm so glad I stumbled upon this.. pay once and play forever…
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.
No package has been scanned for this app, so nothing is published about what it ships. That is an absence of evidence, not a finding.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.0.7 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.7, updated 2023-04-18.
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.
Appworthy
oddworld-google-com-oddworld-munchAssessed 2026-10-26 from 400 user reviews and the store listing. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
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. Two independent signals are read — user reviews and the store listing — 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.