Comparison

紙言 vs GWalker

Price, ratings, monetisation and update history for both apps, side by side — with what reviewers say about each.

Head to head
About

紙言

Features
Read full description

藏在心裡的叫「心事」,在腦海回憶的叫「往事」只有寫在 紙上的,才稱得上「故事」。紙言,一個讓所有事變成故事的地方。

About

GWalker

This app provides a portable reader for a gaming magazine, offering regular issues without registration or subscription. It features online reading, a table of contents for easy navigation, and zoom capabilities for clear viewing of content.

Highlights
  • Portable gaming magazine reader
  • Regularly updated issues
  • Online reading mode
  • No registration required
  • Table of contents navigation
  • Zoom functionality
Features
Read full description

GWalker是GameWeekly遊戲週刊的隨身閱讀器,無需注冊或成為實體訂戶都可免費閱讀定期提供的期數。程式採用線上閱讀模式,無需下載不估用房空間。此外,閱讀器設有目錄功能,可讓用戶按喜好跳轉到所需之頁面,面且可放大縮小,即使地圖也看到一清二楚。

Screenshots

紙言4 screens
GWalker4 screens

Verdict

The call

The clearest difference is rating: 紙言 at 4.3 against GWalker's 1.0. 紙言 also leads on update cadence (weekly vs every 4 months) and ratings volume (3 vs 1). GWalker's advantage is iOS requirement (11.0 vs 18.0). On price, ads, in-app purchases and device support there is nothing between them.

Scored on Price · Rating · Positive reviews · Number of ratings · Update frequency · Ads · In-app purchases · Monetization · Best chart rank · Devices · Requires iOS

CostPrice · In-app purchases · Ads · Monetization

Both are free to download. Neither carries in-app purchases, so what you see is what you pay.

ReceptionRating · Positive reviews · Number of ratings

紙言 holds the better App Store score, 4.3 against 1.0. Both are backed by a comparable volume of ratings — 3 and 1 respectively.

UpkeepUpdate frequency

紙言 ships an update weekly, GWalker every 4 months. The most recent releases landed on November 2, 2026 and November 3, 2026 respectively.

Scorecard4 real differences · 6 level
紙言 versus GWalker: the parameters behind the verdict, then further details
Parameter紙言GWalker
PriceFreeFree
Rating4.3 (3 ratings) — better1.0 (1 ratings)
Positive reviews28.6% of reviews—
Number of ratings3 — better1
Update frequencyWeekly — betterEvery 4 months
AdsNoNo
In-app purchasesNoNo
Monetization—Free
DevicesiPhone, iPad, iPodiPhone, iPad, iPod
Requires iOS18.011.0 — better
Further details — not scored
Size12 MB44 MB
Age rating12+9+
DeveloperinvivoCheuk Hung Wong

Customer experience

紙言

All ratings3 ratings
Positive66.7%
Neutral33.3%
Negative0.0%
Written reviews56 reviews
Positive28.6%
Neutral23.2%
Negative48.2%

GWalker

All ratings1 ratings
Positive0.0%
Neutral0.0%
Negative100.0%

Bugs and requests

紙言

Reported bugs

13 issues
  • App crashes frequently
  • App keeps crashing
  • Constant crashing
  • App is buggy
  • App drains battery
Show 8 more
  • Ads block content
  • Cannot refresh content
  • Constant disconnections
  • Search functionality not working
  • App not updating content
  • App crashes after update
  • Swiping right crashes app
  • App cannot be reinstalled

Requested features

10 requests
  • Add writing function on mobile
  • Add bookmark function
  • Add history record
  • Add dark mode (black background with white text)
  • Add offline reading functionality
Show 5 more
  • Add ability to download articles
  • Add refresh button
  • Add feature to record last read position
  • Add reader rating feature
  • Add paid version without ads

GWalker

Not enough reviews yet to summarise bugs or requests.

In-app purchases

None

紙言

No in-app purchases

None

GWalker

No in-app purchases

Questions

Is 紙言 free?
紙言 is free to download, with no in-app purchases.
Is GWalker free?
GWalker is free to download, with no in-app purchases.
Which has better reviews, 紙言 or GWalker?
紙言 is rated higher. 紙言 averages 4.3 out of 5 from 3 ratings, while GWalker averages 1.0 from 1 ratings.
Do 紙言 or GWalker have ads?
Neither 紙言 nor GWalker shows ads.
Which is updated more often, 紙言 or GWalker?
紙言 ships an update weekly, and GWalker every 4 months. Most recently, 紙言 was updated on November 2, 2026 and GWalker on November 3, 2026.

Other comparisons