Serious warnings 2 confirmed warnings, and users report 2 more things. 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 1.0.53 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.53, updated 2026-10-22.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
This is a casual brain-challenging strategy game. Unlock the screw puzzle and play the plot mini-game. Start challenging your brain now!
How to play?
The goal of the level is quite simple. You just need to put the screws into the toolbox of the corresponding color to complete the challenge. As the level increases, there will be various obstacles blocking you from passing the level. At this time, you need to show your unique strategy and use your brain to unlock the puzzle.
The levels of the game are special and interesting. Each level is carefully designed, and each level will not be repeated, so you will not feel bored. As the level increases, different ways of playing will appear, making the level full of fun!
There are thousands of levels here, and the game content is constantly updated. The rich game content and unique game activities are refreshing.…
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:bb2b43eb3635c5661e864c134b0e9be03b1e637aa4b4a79bedf549c4ba46f3e4Aggressive ad load: raised by 45 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 9 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 5 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 80 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.
Pay to progress: raised by 9 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 44 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: "Thanks for your interest. We will share more once 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:bb2b43eb3635c5661e864c134b0e9be03b1e637aa4b4a79bedf549c4ba46f3e4400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Game itself is fun, but full of ads. The remove ad pack which was, I think $13.99, only removed pop up ads, not the reward ads, like every other games does. Not worth it at all. Ads also become more frequent the more you play, so do…
too much ads. and they allow you to play ads thats supposed to be for in game purchase but forward you to the app store to download other games after the ads, then start the game over not giving you what you purchase through the ads. so…
This game was ok until the later levels came. Yes, its too many ads but there are ways to get around it. I have not made it past level 25. Why? Because its impossible to pass without tools you have to pay for. The 3rd screw you need does…
If you come from ads this game is a spyware and it is not the same as what you see. 500mb for a match 3 type of game with very few of the "mini game" that you see in the ads. Download at your own risk. I would advise against it.
very very bad. its nothing like the ad. im very disappointed.
False advertising is my number 1 enemy in games. It does not run if offline, and when online you are immediately bombarded with ads. Soooo *NOT* worth it.
it's basically a pay to win/watch ads to win game. the main game is a screw game and the asmr game where you fix the girl, it's just a mini game. I feel like some levels are too hard to complete without watching ads. it says it has 5…
It's pay to win. There are levels that are just way too hard to beat, you can't pass unless you buy the extra power ups to help you. the ads are out of control, too.
Pay To Win Game. Game would be a lot more fun and rewarding if they didn't purposefully sabotage the game. litterally will make it to where you can't beat the level then offer you a discount on tool to win. disappointing.
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 1.0.53, 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 1.0.53 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.53, updated 2026-10-22.
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.
screw-matchAssessed 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.