Step into Slide Mahjong: Beauty Blast, where relaxing tile puzzles meet capti…
PT. Setapak Perintis TeknologiSome warnings 9 users report an aggressive ad load. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 86 reviews.
From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.0.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.1, updated 2026-09-11.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Step into Slide Mahjong: Beauty Blast, where relaxing tile puzzles meet captivating visual rewards.
Clear layered tiles, plan your moves, and unlock a world filled with charm, mystery, and stylish beauty scenes waiting to be revealed.
◆ Addictive Tile Matching Gameplay
• Layered Mahjong Puzzle – Tap and collect tiles from stacked layers.
• Match 3 Mechanic – Combine three identical tiles to clear them.
• Strategic Challenge – Limited slots require careful planning.
• Powerful Boosters – Undo, shuffle, and hints help you stay in control.
Easy to learn, satisfying to master.
◆ Unlock Beauty-Themed Visual Stories
• Progress through levels to reveal beautiful themed scenes.
• Each stage brings you closer to unlocking new visuals and surprises.
• Enjoy a smooth blend of puzzle-solving and visual progression.
Relax, play, and discover what’s hidden beneath the tiles.
◆ Collect Stunning Ar…
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.
Aggressive ad load: raised by 9 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 10 reviews we read)
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.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
86 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
just enough game to call it a game. really just a, how many ads is it possible to show app.
Too many ads! You're forced to watch an ad before you can even begin. boo! Shorten them up or UNINSTALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??
Images are VANILLA and ads you want to watch for rewards etc say unavailable but the forced ads work fine. uninstalled.
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 1.0.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.1, updated 2026-09-11.
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
slide-mahjongAssessed 2026-10-27 from 86 user reviews. 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.
This assessment is produced automatically. One independent signal is read — user reviews — and each candidate finding is filed under the source that supports 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.