Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 1,036 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 1.49.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.49.0, updated 2026-09-23.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 1.49.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.49.0, updated 2026-09-21.
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.
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 1
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
Irritating! Too many ads! Why all of a sudden are there ads after every move you make? I am ready to remove this game! It's now 2026 and there are more ads than before!!!!! Do not install this game. Too many ads, too many ads, too many…
The game is fun with the fact that they have other side missions true to The Price is Right game like Plinko and Cliff Hanger. It is a lot easier to ear coins in this bingo game than others I've played. But the cost of the bingo card…
this game is a pay to win. you can't even use in game coin etc to get power ups 🙄 so I'm uninstalling. if it was easier to win, it'll be the real price is right!! but this game should be called the price is wrong. a money hungry game and…
Pay to progress
all ill say is yall know you set this up for your profit only its not even fun to play you have it set so you have to spend money to progress and I hope everyone deletes this sham of an app yall surely do not care about the people playing…
this game is a pay to win. you can't even use in game coin etc to get power ups 🙄 so I'm uninstalling. if it was easier to win, it'll be the real price is right!! but this game should be called the price is wrong. a money hungry game and…
really love the game, but some of the issues are making me consider removing it and finding a new game. Support is a joke once you fially get through the AI and can explain the issue ,they never respond, loyalty points are never right I…
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.