Two kinds of row, never mixed
On most rows here, the reward figure is someone else's. What we add to those is the cross-check: which lists carry the code, what reward each one claims, which lists have moved it to their expired table, and where all of that disagrees. Those rows are labelled reported, and the figure belongs to whoever published it.
Some reported rows carry a date on which we entered the code ourselves and the game accepted it. That is a real third state and the row says so plainly: we got it in, but we did not write down what it paid, so the reward figure stays theirs rather than becoming ours. An accepted code with no recorded payout is not a verified code, and we do not promote it to one later from memory.
A smaller set of rows is labelled verified. Those we entered on our own account while someone watched what happened, and each carries a receipt. Where a game pays currency that receipt is the balance before and after, and consecutive codes have to chain — one code's closing balance is the next one's opening balance, so a made-up row breaks the chain. Where a game pays items instead, there is no balance to chain, so the rules tighten elsewhere: every item is copied from the confirmation screen with its exact count, and the game's own success message goes in beside it. No receipt, no verified row.
The two never get merged into one figure. Wherever a page shows a reward, the label beside it tells you whose reward it is.
What counts as two sources
A reported code goes onto a page when at least two independent lists carry it as working and no majority has killed it. The word doing the work there is independent, and we had it wrong at first.
Two lists count as one source if the same company publishes both, or if their tables run in identical order with identical reward wording — including the order of their expired sections. We have found both kinds. In one case two sites with different names and different domains were printing the same table word for word; in another, two brands turned out to belong to a single publisher. When that happens we merge the pair into one source and re-apply the two-source test, rather than keeping one and discarding the other.
This is not hypothetical bookkeeping. It has already kept codes off this site that a naive count would have let through: two entries carried by exactly one publisher under two brand names, and by none of the eight other lists we read that morning. We also do not assume the pairing holds everywhere — two sites that copy each other on one game may keep genuinely different tables on another, so we re-check the pairing per game rather than blacklisting a domain.
Being held back is not the same as being wrong, and we would rather say that here than let the rule read as cleaner than it is. On that same morning two more lists refused our requests, and the page title one of them showed in search results carried the very update tag those two codes are named after. So the honest statement is not "those codes are fake" — it is that one publisher is not enough for us to put a number on this site, and we will look again tomorrow.
What our labels mean
- Verified — we entered it and it paid us. The row shows the balance change, or — where the game pays items rather than currency — the itemised drop and the game's own success message.
- Accepted but unpaid — the game took the code without giving us anything (usually "already claimed"). We quote what the game said.
- Reported — someone else lists it and we have not confirmed it. The reward figure is theirs, not ours, and we label it that way.
- Expired — it worked once and no longer does. We keep it, struck through, because knowing a code is dead saves you the same time as knowing one is live.
We publish what we did not test
Every game page has a "what we have not tested" section. It is the part most code sites would delete, and it is the part that tells you how much to trust the rest. If we did not try lower-case codes, or never entered a wrong string to see the error, that goes on the page.
What we stopped doing, and when
This site launched on a stricter promise than the one above: that every code here would be redeemed by us before it was listed. We kept that up for the codes still marked verified, and their receipts are unchanged. We are not deleting them or quietly restating what they were.
On September 17, 2026 we stopped redeeming codes by hand. The reason is ordinary: these games patch almost daily, each patch can add or kill codes, and one person opening a Roblox client cannot keep pace with six games. The honest options were to let the promise rot silently — which is exactly the failure we built this site to complain about — or to change what the site does and say so on this page. We took the second.
So: we do not re-test codes after a patch any more. What runs every morning instead is the cross-check — the other lists are read, the differences between them are recorded, and the date on each game is the date of that reading, not of a redemption. Rows added since that date are reported rows, and none of them claims otherwise.
Where we look for codes
Codes come from the people who make the game. We read the experience description and the developer's Roblox group shout directly. Coverage of most games also points to a community server as where drops are announced first; where we have not checked that channel ourselves, the game's page says so in its untested list. Strings that circulate on other code lists without an origin we can point at do not get promoted — the same generic string often turns up across unrelated games, real in one and unverifiable in the rest.
When we get it wrong
We will. When it happens, the fix goes on the page with the date, rather than being quietly edited away. Spot something wrong? Tell us — a correction is worth more to this site than a page view.