What’s the catch? Multiple ad networks bundled — measured, backed by SDKs in the app package.
Analyzed automatically from 6 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.
App Store
This analysis describes version 5.38 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 5.38, updated 2026-09-25.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 5.32 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version VARY, updated 2026-10-02.
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 4
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
the ads are ridiculous. after every single game, there will be an ad. if you exit the app and reenter again, there will be an ad break. really spoils the game experience.
so much ads
I've played for years at this point, currently level 4443. The game was ruined with the last update (Sept. 17, 2026). Puzzle types that would normally be challenging and maybe require 2 or 3 ad viewings to gain power ups and finish the…
Progress pauses until you wait or pay
goes from 0 to 100 right after the tutorial. limited lives are STUPID LET ME PLAY YOUR F-ING GAME OR DONT! I can't even just sit down, relax long enough to get the hang of it and play a F-ING mobile game anymore without this stupid lives…
Needs more time — I am only on level 9 and I constantly have to watch adds for more time or lives it is almost impossible to finish a level in the time it gives you then you run out of lives and you have to watch adds to play
Not relaxing — Time limit is too short. It holds the memory of not closing it out when you close the app which is awful. There are too many options behind each set of items. Level 7 and already annoyed with this game and ran out of lives…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
nothing like the ads
I Give this 1 star because of Misleading/Deceptive Advertising when I saw the ad it showed a fun, Simple and Calm sorting game but when I played it in app it was very different there was Locks and Timers which makes the game different…
I was enjoying the game so I bought the no adds version. then the game changes to be too hard to play without watching more adds and more adds for more time and help items. nothing but a bait and switch.
Pay to progress
Game designed to be Pay to Win. They want you to move with an inhumane speed to solve these levels, especially the hard ones. I am hard-stuck at level 11. I am almost certain that it is impossible to complete the level without paying for…
Loved it, but it became impossible to win without spending cash - watching ads wasn't enough to win enough time - so I deleted it
bought the ad free version because I initially liked the game and thought I'd show my appreciation for a nice game. it is fun until you hit levels that are impossible without power ups. pay to win is not my jam. but until then, was…
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
Show 4 more purchases we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
How the automated analysis works
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.
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.