We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 2.0.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 2.0.0, updated 2026-09-22.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Aggressive ad load
Love this game, way too many ads — I love this game, but will probably not play it again. During one game it broke away (randomly) for short ads, a dozen or more times. I don’t mind once, but this was insane
BE CAREFUL — Tons of ads and pop ups that force in app purchases. I am deleting now
Great until level 60+ ads — I really enjoyed this app until sometime in level 60 when suddenly pop-up ads started disrupting the gameplay. I don't mind ads between games on free apps because that makes sense. But every 10 to 15 seconds…
Pay to progress
DO NOT DOWNLOAD — Awful. The higher you get, the more ads keep popping up mid-game. Can’t even get through a level because of the ads. And it becomes impossible to beat a level without spending money. A waste of space and it kills your…
Frustrating — It gets to the point where you can’t move without using help. Eventually you run out and have to pay more to continue.
Must pay to win 💸 — Graphics simpler than others. Ads after every level after the first few. Paid to remove ads, but then there’s no way to defeat the levels without either paying for a booster or watching an ad. 5 coins per level…
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, 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.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.