Visual Assets
8 screenshotsStore Profile
Identity
- Publisher
- King
- iOS app ID
- 850417475
Market Signals
- US top grossing
- 26
- Downloads
- 620M
- Rating
- 4.6
Loading lower dossier sections.

| platform identifier | com.king.candycrushsodasaga |
|---|---|
| Store title | Candy Crush Soda Saga |
| iOS app ID | 850417475 |
| ios bundle id | com.midasplayer.apps.candycrushsodasaga |
| ios title | Candy Crush Soda Saga |
| Publisher | King |
| version | 1.320.3 |
| rating average | 4.58 |
| rating display | 4.6 |
| rating count | 8870000 |
| downloads bucket | 500M+ |
| store category | Puzzle |
| content rating | PEGI 3 |
| paid | false |
| price | Install |
| updated on | 2026-06-22 |
| whats new | {"notes":["Get ready for a Sodalicious update.","Explore the world of Soda in new episodes.","Play stickylicious new levels.","Download the latest version to access the new content."],"version":null} |
| ios version | 1.319.4 |
| ios current version release date | 2026-05-26 |
| ios rating average | 4.72 |
| ios rating count | 761720 |
| ios price | 0 |
| ios size mb | 286.5 |
| US top grossing | 26 |
| ios us top grossing rank | 41 |
| Download estimate | 620M |
Loading lower dossier sections.
No exact-game UA creatives found.
A move-limited match-3 loop: swap candies to make matches, trigger cascades and specials, complete a level objective before moves run out, then spend earned progress on the next board or booster-driven retry.
The benchmark is a mature match-3 system where the hidden complexity is not swapping candies but making objectives, blockers, cascades, boosters, and near-fail economy feel fair; a prototype should isolate objective clarity and move-limit tension before copying meta layers.
Candy Crush Soda Saga has proven medium-high puzzle depth through objectives, blockers, cascades, special candies, and move pressure, but its depth is fragile: if objective impact is unclear or boosters feel required, the system compresses into random spectacle and monetized friction.
15 of 15 responses include lens metadata.

Routine puzzle play and clear goals are a good fit, with clutter and accumulated systems as the main concern.
I would install it as a daily puzzle routine because the rules look familiar and the progression should be easy to follow. The colorful boards are busy, but the pieces still look distinct enough for casual solving. My worry is that a long-running free game may add too many menus, events, and currencies over time. If it keeps the next level obvious and lets me make steady progress, I would likely keep it.
Routine puzzle play and clear goals are a good fit, with clutter and accumulated systems as the main concern.I like that the level-based puzzle routine looks familiar and easy to continue.
I worry the game may have too many surrounding menus or currencies after years of updates.
The candy board looks colorful but still readable enough for casual daily play.
I would try it, but I would not expect much strategy beyond planning a few moves ahead. The game looks easy to pick up during a spare moment, and the board layout seems much less stressful than action games with virtual sticks. My concern is whether the progression becomes a grind where the best decision is simply to buy help. For a short puzzle habit, it has enough polish to earn a download.
Readable light planning and mobile convenience fit well, but limited strategic depth and potential monetization slowdowns reduce certainty.I like that the puzzle decisions look clear without requiring a complicated control scheme.
I worry that later progress may depend too much on paid help instead of good planning.
The board-focused layout looks calmer and easier to manage than a busy action interface.
I would download it cautiously because it looks very polished and established, which matters if I might spend money later. I do not mind paying for convenience or an ad-free feeling when the value is clear, but I am wary of daily pressure and booster bundles. The store presence and massive downloads make it feel trustworthy, while the bright candy boards make the basic play easy to judge. I would keep it only if purchases feel optional rather than necessary.
High polish and brand trust support install intent, with value sensitivity focused on free-to-play pressure.I like that it looks professionally maintained and easy to assess before spending.
I am cautious about daily pressure, bundles, or purchases that feel required.
The clean, colorful boards make the core puzzle look simple and polished.
I would download it because match puzzles fit the kind of stop-and-start play I can actually manage. The levels look clear enough that I could play one during a break and come back later without relearning anything. I am less interested if it expects constant events, subscriptions, or too many reminders. The cheerful visuals help, but the real appeal is that it looks easy to pause and resume around family and work interruptions.
The game strongly matches short, interruptible puzzle sessions, while subscription-like or event pressure would reduce retention.I like that it looks easy to play in short bursts and resume later.
I would dislike pressure to log in constantly or pay for ongoing access.
The colorful board looks clear enough to understand even in a quick break.
I would download it because it looks like a polished puzzle game that would be easy to compare with friends or family. The huge download count and long-running name make it feel reliable, not like some unfinished app. I like the bright boards and clear goals, but I would be watching for pop-ups or purchase pressure after the first few levels. If the competition stays friendly and optional, I could see myself playing it in regular breaks.
Trust, polish, and social comparison support strong install intent, while purchase interruptions remain a concern.I like that it appears established, readable, and easy to compare progress with others.
I would dislike too many pop-ups or offers interrupting the puzzle flow.
The bright puzzle boards look polished and clear enough to follow quickly.

Tablet readability and familiar puzzle play are strong positives, while clutter and pressure are moderate concerns.
I would install it on a tablet because the puzzle pieces look large, bright, and easy to tap. It seems like a calm enough game to play while sitting at home, even if some levels may become challenging. I am not looking for competition here, so leaderboards or pressure would not matter much to me. My main worry is clutter around the board, but the core matching play looks comfortable.
Tablet readability and familiar puzzle play are strong positives, while clutter and pressure are moderate concerns.I like that the pieces look large enough for comfortable tablet play.
I would dislike extra clutter or competitive pressure around a simple puzzle.
The bright board looks readable and touch-friendly on a larger screen.
I would be somewhat interested, but more as a simple puzzle than a strategy game. The matching board looks clear enough for gentle planning, yet I do not see much evidence of meaningful choices beyond picking the best move. That may be fine for passing time, but I would skip it if progress depends on luck or paid help. I would try it if I wanted something easy outside the house, not if I wanted a thoughtful long session.
Light planning creates some fit, but lack of deeper strategy and possible paid shortcuts limit download intent.I like that the board offers simple planning without looking overwhelming.
I worry the decisions may be too shallow or too dependent on paid help.
The candy grid is clear, but it does not make the game look especially strategic.
I would download it only if I felt confident I could keep it peaceful without constant ads or unclear charges. The game looks polished and familiar, and the candy boards are easy enough to understand from the store images. My concern is that a free game this large may rely on booster offers or recurring pressure. I might keep it if there is a simple way to play calmly and pay only when I choose.
Trust and clarity are adequate for a cautious trial, but monetization uncertainty is decisive for this sample.I like that the game looks established and easy to understand.
I am concerned about ads, booster pressure, or unclear ongoing costs.
The bright boards look friendly, though I would prefer the surrounding experience to stay quiet.
I would download it for a daily puzzle because the game looks familiar, colorful, and easy to understand. The levels seem like they would give me a small goal to finish without needing quick reactions. I do worry the bright effects could become a little busy, and I would not want too many offers interrupting me. If it stays calm after the first few sessions, I could see it becoming part of my routine.
The daily puzzle routine fits strongly, with moderate concerns around visual busyness and free-to-play interruptions.I like that it promises clear, familiar puzzle goals for a daily routine.
I would dislike flashy clutter or frequent offers breaking the calm pace.
The candy visuals are cheerful, though the effects could feel busy if overused.
I would probably try it because matching pieces is easy to understand and close enough to other tile puzzles I enjoy. The board looks bright and the basic goal seems clear without needing fast reflexes. I would be cautious about too many special pieces, pop-ups, or purchases once the game gets harder. If the tap and swipe controls are forgiving, it could be a pleasant occasional puzzle.
Familiar tile-like rules and accessible controls support trial, with complexity and purchase pressure as age-segment concerns.I like that the matching rules look familiar and easy to start.
I would dislike too many special rules, icons, or purchase prompts appearing at once.
The board looks colorful and clear enough for simple touch play.

Puzzle clarity supports a trial, but competitive depth and fairness concerns limit enthusiasm.
I would only download this if I wanted a light puzzle grind, not a main game. The match boards look readable and probably satisfying when combos chain, but I am skeptical about how much skill matters once the difficulty ramps. Free-to-play boosters make me wonder whether beating a hard level feels earned or just paid around. I would try a few levels, but I need fair challenge and not just bright effects.
Puzzle clarity supports a trial, but competitive depth and fairness concerns limit enthusiasm.I like that the board looks clean enough for quick pattern reading and combo planning.
I worry that paid help could undercut the feeling of earning wins.
The bright effects look satisfying, but they do not prove the challenge has depth.
I would download it as a cozy little break game, especially because the candy art feels cheerful instead of intense. It looks easy to play one-handed and pause after a level, which is perfect when I just need something low effort. My hesitation is that free-to-play puzzle games can start feeling less cozy when they push lives, boosters, or streak pressure. If it lets me make steady progress without nagging me, I could keep it around for relaxing moments.
The game aligns well with cozy short-session play, with monetization and pressure as the main risks.I like the cheerful puzzle style and the promise of quick, low-effort progress.
I would dislike it if lives or booster prompts made the game feel stressful.
The candy colors make it look friendly and easy to dip into for a few minutes.
I would install this for short gaps because the levels look like something I can start and finish without settling in. The board is bright and readable, which matters if I am playing on a train or waiting somewhere. What worries me is whether later levels turn into a blocker where I need ads, lives, or paid boosters to keep moving. As a quick phone puzzle, though, it fits my use case better than most heavier games.
The game fits short-session puzzle play well, with concern centered on later friction and monetization pacing.I like that each level looks quick, clear, and easy to resume.
I worry that progress may slow down unless I watch ads or buy help.
The colorful board and large pieces look readable enough for one-handed phone play.
I would probably skip this unless I specifically wanted comfort food on my phone. It looks polished and the swipe matching is clear, but I do not see much of a weird hook or world that makes me curious. The candy theme is cheerful, yet it feels more like a proven machine than a game with a surprising personality. I might try it for a few levels, but it would need clever twists early to hold me.
Clear controls and polish help, but low originality and limited world appeal make the install intent softer for this sample.I like that the interaction looks simple and polished enough to understand right away.
I do not see a fresh idea or distinctive world that would pull me in.
The colorful candy board looks clean, but it also makes the game feel very familiar.
I would probably download it for a quick check because it is instantly understandable and the huge player base makes it feel like a safe casual pick. The bright candy boards look easy to read and easy to show someone without explaining much. I do worry it might feel like an older hype cycle more than something my friends are actively talking about now. If the early levels move fast and the purchases stay out of my face, I could keep it for bored moments.
Strong familiarity, polish, and social proof support a trial, while lower novelty and possible free-to-play pressure hold the score back.I like that it looks polished, familiar, and easy to understand immediately.
I am not sure it feels current enough to become a game I talk about with friends.
The bright candy pieces and clean board make the play loop look obvious at a glance.
No segment scores in this group yet.
0 of 3 segments score this higher than the current game.