Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 955 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
App Store
This analysis describes version 11.3 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 11.3, updated 2026-09-29.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 2.7901 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 2.7901, updated 2026-09-23.
What the analysis found
The catch list 2
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 2
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 and hate. The game is fun, but the ad is way too insane. A lot of the ads took up to almost 3 min. Sometimes they feed me 3 ads together, each took up to 45 seconds. And, a lot of times the count down doesn't start right away and the…
$9.99 or adds?? you start to play the game, the music is a little abnoxious and the game is just ok. after some levels you get a pop up to choose $9.99 adds free. We have way better games for 4.99. Definitely not worth the price. I have a…
I really enjoy the game itself, but it's infested with ads. I hate having to watch ads whenever I finish a level (or you don't get your rewards for winning the level). Uninstalling because the amount of ads is relentless and ruins the…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
this might be a great game but it is not what I saw advertised. I'm tired of fake ads for games. it's so rare to find ad that is true to the game lately. this ad touted relaxing timer free levels... every level had a timer. uninstalled…
Does have ads!!! Despite advertising that there are no ads, no WiFi required etc.. After level 7 it gave me the option to go ad free for a cost...so the fact they advertise the game as ad free is a lie.
Another bait and switch. The only similarities to the ad are that there are flowers. No boxes with three flowers in each box, like the ad shows; which is why I downloaded it. Also, it got boring very quickly. Uninstalling.
Pay to progress
level 1103: game became too difficult. I kept trying. The ads are non stop and usually between 2-3 minutes. You cannot progress without spending money. I got to this level with zero dollars. I never made an in app purchase. However with…
Becomes pay to win — Once you get into the intermediate difficulty levels, they sprinkle in some levels that are unsolvable without power ups.
Pay to win — Eventually you’ll get to a point where you’re not given enough time at all to complete the level and you are expected to use up your power moves. It was fun in the beginning but it’s starts getting annoying and ridiculous…
What this app sells
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.