BC-0117 · CORE GUIDE
Editorial review 2026-09-26
Roblox Build and Roblox Select
Eligible Build games can apply through Roblox Select for players ages 9–15, subject to content review. Treat Select as a separate audience-review workflow, not a setting that becomes approved when a creator publishes or reaches an activity threshold.
Objective
Understand the Build-to-Select audience-review relationship without treating entry conditions as approval.
Before you start
- Identify the actual game version and current audience state.
- Read the current game and creator requirements together.
- Use the legitimate Audience Reach status rather than a third-party eligibility score.
Steps
- Record the present audience and desired review path.
- Check game and creator conditions as separate fields.
- Compare the submitted description with the actual game behavior.
- Follow the available application or correction workflow.
- Record the displayed result before describing broader audience access as enabled.
Verification
- An entry threshold is not labelled a favorable content review.
- The status record preserves pending and unmet states.
- The described game matches the version being evaluated.
- No universal maintenance requirement or approval timeline is invented.
Limitations
- This guide cannot assess private account eligibility or approve content.
- Current entry evidence does not guarantee acceptance.
- Build's separate Kids restriction must not be overwritten by general audience guidance.
Working notes
Separate the game requirement, creator requirement and review outcome. A qualifying activity record does not answer whether the submitting creator meets the current conditions or whether the content passes review. Track each state independently so a completed counter is not mistaken for audience approval.
Use the current official entry guidance and the status shown in Audience Reach. Read the dated entry-requirements callout alongside the current account status; do not reuse a number from an older screenshot or invent a universal maintenance rule. If the account view and documentation appear inconsistent, preserve the exact message and source context.
Prepare the game description and tested behavior to match the submitted version. A reviewer and an intended player should encounter the same core activity, not an innocuous description attached to substantially different content. Correct a genuine mismatch rather than trying to conceal it through promotional wording.
Decide what to do from the actual state. An unmet requirement calls for understanding that requirement, a pending submission calls for tracking its status, and a requested correction calls for addressing the identified issue. None is a reason to claim that the broader audience has already been enabled.
Examples
- Readiness record: game eligibility / creator eligibility / content version / application state / review result / audience state actually shown. Each field needs its own evidence, and unknown remains a valid entry.
- Hypothetical case: the activity condition appears satisfied, but no favorable review is recorded. The correct summary is ready to examine the remaining requirements, not approved for younger players.
- Correction packet: exact review message, affected scene or behavior, the change made and a check against the submitted version. Do not invent an appeal or resubmission deadline when the current workflow does not provide one.