We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 1.33 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.33, updated 2026-08-28.
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
Fun but no options — The game was fun at first. But I’ve been stuck on a level for a while. You can’t watch an ad for any power ups and all the power ups cost a lot of coins. They either need to come down on the coins that have to be used…
Like it, but too many issues — Too many ads and cause system crash a lot, damage
Keeps freezing and doesn’t allow me to watch ads anymore? — Before the update, I was having trouble with it, freezing up and kicking me out altogether. So I did the update but now I can’t even watch an ad for boosters anymore? furthermore…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Fake — Fake ad. Not the same game. I hateeeee that shady bait and switch BS. App Store needs better regulation. -10000 stars for being scammy.
Misleading ads — The ads are all about the rows of food you can add to the pot but that’s maybe 1 out of every dozen levels. The rest is all picking things out of the pot. Kinda boring
Not what advertised on another ad game — Downloaded after playing the add game a few times. Thought it would be fun. Nothing like the ad. Irritating by being false advertised
Pay to progress
Miss the ad option — I miss when we could watch ads to get an extra dish or a power up because now the levels are almost impossible to beat without paying, and I can’t pay. I don’t want to delete this game because I really really really…
“Free game” is an absolute lie — I was tempted to give this 1 star honestly, but because the base game is a fun concept, I’m being nice. I like the overall game’s mechanics, and I could see myself really liking this game. However, there…
Pay to Win — during gameplay if you got stuck on a level you could watch an ad to get an extra bowl for help, but now they don’t offer that as an option anymore. you have to use coins and if you don’t have any then you have to spend your…
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.