Games and entertainment decision

Spill It

A single developer can reproduce the core pass-and-play Q&A and voting experience in a few weeks, but you lose the publisher’s content pipeline, App Store presence, and polish that justify the paid product.

View on the App Store
You pay

$1.25/mo

$15/yr

Read off the official pricing page.

You’d pay instead

$100one-off44 h to build

$0/mo3 h/mo upkeep

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 7 seats.

No open-source build does this yet

Nothing published replaces this one, so a replacement starts from an empty file. Here is what it would have to cover.

What a replacement has to do

  • Show one question at a time, let players take turns answering, enable voting/exposure mechanics, and advance to the next question.

What it still won’t have

  • Polish, QA, and App Store presence (reviews, ratings, discoverability)
  • Ongoing curated question updates at scale and moderation workflow
  • Marketing and existing user base
  • Designer-level animations and UX polish

What remains hard

  • Product polish and ongoing maintenance
Read the build prompt

First-year cost

Keep paying

Paying is—cheaper in year one.

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 7 seats.

Paid seatsseats

Money you would actually spend

Keep paying
—

Subscription price × seats × 12

Build it
—

AI build —APIs + hosting —

Time you would spend

—

—

What you would spend

What we assumed

The verdict above measures whether you could build it. This one is only about money.

Runnable build prompt

Not run yet
Build an iOS app in Swift and SwiftUI with local JSON-seeded question decks and categories, pass-and-play turn-taking, voting/’who here’ exposure view, local persistence (Core Data or SQLite), StoreKit subscription gating, configurable question editor (for admin use), and unit/UI tests. Out of scope: multi-device realtime sync, backend question CMS, analytics pipeline, and paid marketing. Include error handling for purchase failures, data migration, and App Store-ready metadata; provide CI build script and automated tests.
How we checked2 sources · 2/3 runs agreed · evidence score 56

How the score was reached

  • Partly verdict base52
  • 2 cited sources+1
  • Price verified on pricing page+3
  • Evidence score56

The base comes from the verdict. Everything under it is a check that either happened or did not, and each one is a fact frozen in this record rather than a judgement made at render time - so the same evidence always produces the same number.

How scoring works →

Cited sources · 2

Every page the run actually retrieved.

Integrity checks

What held up, and what did not.

✓ Price read off the page! 2 of 3 runs agreed; the verdict is the majority✓ Citations limited to fetched pages! 1 moat recorded