Glotier tells you whether ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity name your product when buyers ask what to use in your category. It puts your buyers' real questions to all three as live web queries, records whether you were named and by which of them, which competitors were named instead, and which pages each answer was built from.

How does Glotier check AI visibility?

It runs one live web search per question. ChatGPT and Gemini read the identical results, and Perplexity runs its own retrieval because it does not accept results handed to it. Whether your product is named is decided by a literal presence check on the answer text rather than by asking a model for its opinion, so the number cannot be inflated by a model being agreeable. You can also connect your own ChatGPT or Claude key and have the questions run through your account instead.

Why ask three assistants instead of one?

Because they disagree. In our own study, across the 39 of 40 buying questions where all three answered, all three named the same product only 30% of the time and 47% of products were named by exactly one assistant. Checking a single assistant shows you 58% to 65% of the products named across the three, so a founder who checks ChatGPT, sees their name and relaxes has measured one engine on one phrasing.

Is Glotier free to use?

The check is free with no signup. Paid plans start at $9.99 a month (Fast, one product), then Solo at $39, Studio at $99 and Agency at $249. Every paid plan covers the daily check and the content the agent writes.

Does Glotier make up data about my product?

No. Every result comes from observed data: the live search results, the answers the assistants actually returned, and the sources they cited. It does not invent metrics, ratings or engine claims, and when a measurement has not run it says so rather than printing a zero.

Anyone selling something buyers research before choosing, where the category has enough alternatives that an assistant has to pick a shortlist: software, tools, e-commerce, and services. Founders, marketers and agencies all use it, and the work is the same at any size. It is not useful for local or in-person businesses, where maps and reviews decide the outcome instead.

How large was the review sample?

7,500 recent public reviews were analyzed across 50 games, 150 reviews per game.

Were these games selected from all mobile games?

No. The sample is the top-grossing games on the US Google Play chart as of 2026-07-15, so it reflects the highest-earning tier, not mobile games in general.

Does 70% of games having monetization complaints mean those games are pay-to-win?

Not necessarily. It means 35 of 50 games had at least one monetization complaint among their top five themes, which can include pay-to-win concerns, expensive in-app purchases, or feeling pushed to spend. It is not a judgement about any single game.

What do players complain about most?

Monetization (70% of games), stability issues like crashes and bugs (62%), and ads (54%) are the three most widespread complaint themes across the sample.

What do players praise most?

Fun, addictive gameplay is nearly universal, praised in 49 of 50 games (98%). Graphics and visual design (52%) and a relaxing feel (36%) follow.

Is the data still current?

The analysis ran on 2026-07-15. Review sentiment shifts over time, but the themes reflect real player feedback captured then.

Category analysis

What players really complain about in the top-grossing mobile games

Across 50 of the top-grossing mobile games on the US Google Play chart, monetization is the most common complaint theme: it appears among the top five complaints of 35 of 50 games (70%). Gameplay, by contrast, is praised in 49 of the 50 games (98%). The pattern is consistent across the tier: these games win on gameplay and lose on monetization.

Based on 7,500 recent public reviews across 50 games (150 per game), 5,073 classified positive and 1,998 negative, spanning 36 genres. Analysis date 2026-07-15. Ratings and the grossing chart are Google Play’s own figures. Installs and revenue are not public, so they are not shown or estimated.

How this was measured

For each game, its top five complaint themes and top five praise themes were grouped into transparent keyword categories. A count below is the number of distinct games (out of 50) with at least one theme in that category among their top five. Raw review text was analyzed and then discarded; only the theme counts remain. The figures describe how many games share a theme, not a judgement of any single game.

What players complain about

Complaint theme	Games (of 50)	Share
monetization (pay-to-win, expensive in-app purchases, predatory or forced spending)	35 / 50	70%
stability (crashes, bugs, glitches, freezes, lag)	31 / 50	62%
advertising (too many ads, misleading or forced ads)	27 / 50	54%
fairness (rigged outcomes, unfair matchmaking, scripted losses)	13 / 50	26%
support (unresponsive or unhelpful customer service)	8 / 50	16%
progression (grindy, slow progress, energy or lives gating)	5 / 50	10%

What players praise

Praise theme	Games (of 50)	Share
gameplay (fun, addictive, engaging, enjoyable)	49 / 50	98%
graphics and visual design	26 / 50	52%
relaxing or calming	18 / 50	36%
ad-free experience (no ads, few ads)	16 / 50	32%
variety and content depth	12 / 50	24%
free to play	10 / 50	20%
social and multiplayer	7 / 50	14%

What the pattern means

The near-universal praise for gameplay suggests engaging core mechanics are a baseline for commercial success in this tier, not a differentiator. The friction is elsewhere. Monetization is a top complaint in 70% of the games, and technical stability in 62%, so even the highest earners carry widespread dissatisfaction about spending pressure and crashes. The figures are aggregate. They describe how many games share a theme, not whether any single game is good or bad.

Key takeaways

35 of 50 top-grossing games (70%) have monetization among their top 5 complaints.
49 of 50 games (98%) have gameplay praise (fun, addictive, engaging) among their top 5 positives.
Stability issues like crashes and bugs are a top complaint for 31 of 50 games (62%).
Advertising complaints are in the top 5 for 27 of 50 games (54%).
The three most widespread complaint themes are monetization, stability, and ads; gameplay is the near-universal strength.

Frequently asked questions

How large was the review sample?: 7,500 recent public reviews were analyzed across 50 games, 150 reviews per game.
Were these games selected from all mobile games?: No. The sample is the top-grossing games on the US Google Play chart as of 2026-07-15, so it reflects the highest-earning tier, not mobile games in general.
Does 70% of games having monetization complaints mean those games are pay-to-win?: Not necessarily. It means 35 of 50 games had at least one monetization complaint among their top five themes, which can include pay-to-win concerns, expensive in-app purchases, or feeling pushed to spend. It is not a judgement about any single game.
What do players complain about most?: Monetization (70% of games), stability issues like crashes and bugs (62%), and ads (54%) are the three most widespread complaint themes across the sample.
What do players praise most?: Fun, addictive gameplay is nearly universal, praised in 49 of 50 games (98%). Graphics and visual design (52%) and a relaxing feel (36%) follow.
Is the data still current?: The analysis ran on 2026-07-15. Review sentiment shifts over time, but the themes reflect real player feedback captured then.

All 202 game teardowns

This finding is drawn from the 50 top-grossing games analyzed for it. The full library of teardowns, 202 games in total, each with its own review breakdown, lives here:

Browse all game teardowns