Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 958 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 1.64.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.64.0, updated 2026-09-24.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 1.64.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.64.0, updated 2026-09-23.
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.
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
False advertising. If the game was actually about delivering packages, like the add showed, and not a generic match 3, then I'd rate it higher, but since it participates in false information and the like, one star for me. Don't support…
good enough game, no ads, but nothing like the ad, like not even the same kind of game! so loses teo stars for false advertising. edit: took off another star and uninstalled. by level 55 the game has been infected with animated icons…
the ad is a completely different game play model. I didn't want a puzzle game. I wanted a farming style game like the ad.
Pay to progress
Decent game — Just gonna have to spend money to level up. At Level 4874. Definitely have to spend money or you end up playing a level 5-10+ times and then you magically clear the level with no lives left. Also coins you could use to get…
None of the videos or screen shots in the description show the actual gameplay. — None of the videos or screen shots in the description show the actual gameplay. Another basic puzzle game where you have to spend money to win
Pay to win — At high levels the game is pay to win. The algorithms are set to instantly make you spend any in game credits or power ups. After you lose a few times, the game will give you a lot of good stuff to make it to the next level…
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 5 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. 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.