Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 1,021 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 0.2.406 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 0.2.406, updated 2026-09-17.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 0.2.406 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 0.2.406, updated 2026-09-17.
What the analysis found
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
it has too many ads and not enough stories on here.
It's fun enough, but if you try to watch ads, the app doesn't stay open to record that you did that, meaning you can't watch ads at all, even if you need to.
too many ads
Progress pauses until you wait or pay
you run out of energy really quickly. No way of earning energy... you get 2 energy for ad breaks. the ads are overly obsessive... everything is way overpriced. you can only make money if you have energy that you burn through quickly…
I really do like the game, it's super fun to play. However, I just made a purchase for my diamonds, energy and cash, it took my money but didn't give what I paid for. Then I paid using my google play balance, it went through as payment…
I like this game, but can only play for a couple of minutes before you have to wait til you get more points and cash to play again, can be a free game if you dont mind watching a ton of ads to get more stuff to progress, which defeats the…
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.