What’s the catch? Aggressive ad load — reported by 28 users.
Analyzed automatically from 3 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.
This analysis describes version 3.6.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 3.6.0, updated 2026-09-24.
What the analysis found
The catch list 1
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.
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
NOT AD FREE MISLEADING ADS — U get 8-10 levels in and after that every level makes u watch an ad. It advertises ad free . U want ad free pay 5.99 . False advertisement I hate it
No Ads Yet — I love playing Mahjong, but one of the ones advertised as having no ads for free turned out to have too many ads. So far so good for this one! Let’s hope it continues to have no ads. If so, I’ll be completely satisfied for…
Too many “videos” — I really like the game but there is too many ads. And they are long. Every time you finish a game, boom!, an ad. Then you have to tap it quite a few times to get it to move on. The game is supposed to be relaxing, not…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
NOT AD FREE MISLEADING ADS — U get 8-10 levels in and after that every level makes u watch an ad. It advertises ad free . U want ad free pay 5.99 . False advertisement I hate it
Disappointed — Very disappointed, I love the game, downloaded especially since it said NO ADS, so why after 1 or 2 games there is an add. I find this to be false advertising on your part. I will definitely be deleting this game.
Advertisement Lied — The game seems like it would be great, the ad I saw in another game said that this had absolutely positively zero ads… which I guess was true until you get to level 11 and then you get bombarded. I get they need to…
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 1 more purchase 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. 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.