On this page
The NPPA’s imported-game approval index is primary evidence for published decisions. Use it to verify a result and sharpen partner research. Never treat it as a complete history of projects that considered, prepared, entered, left, restarted, or failed to reach the process. The denominator and most timelines are hidden, so the list cannot support an “average approval time” for your game.
Never promise a launch date or approval outcome from public batches. Formal mainland publishing is distinct from Chinese-language visibility on an international storefront.
Use the list to verify claims, not predict outcomes
The index lets a studio work from official public results rather than screenshots, reposts, or industry rumours. For entries exposed by the official pages and attachments, you can inspect the information the authority chose to publish and verify that a reported decision exists.
Across a long enough observation window, the list can also sharpen partner questions. Which titles and platforms appear? Which local publishing or operating entities are named? Are there clusters that deserve closer qualitative research? Does a claimed approval match the official record?
Stop at what you can observe. Use those facts to ask better questions.
Build a dated diligence sheet
Keep a dated research sheet that links directly to official result pages. Record only fields actually disclosed. Preserve the publication date and the date you checked it. If you tag genre, origin, business model, or platform, mark those as your own research classifications rather than official fields.
Use the sheet in three ways:
- verify partner claims about named approved titles;
- identify relevant publishers or operators for deeper due diligence;
- prepare focused questions about build scope, rights, content review, materials, revisions, and post-approval operation.
Next, build a dependency map for your title: partner qualification, rights documents, content assessment, build readiness, requested revisions, formal status evidence, storefront work, infrastructure, support, and launch gates. This map shows where your own work can stall. A duration borrowed from unrelated games cannot.
The public list omits the queue you would need
The missing fields are exactly the ones a forecast would need: when each project began preparing, whether complete materials were accepted, how long studio revisions took, and which projects were withdrawn, abandoned, or never found an eligible applicant. Commercial terms, marketing spend, player demand, distribution coverage, service quality, and profitability are absent too.
A public-result date may differ from the release date. Time between batches gives you no service-level promise, and a batch size gives you no approval probability. Even a game that looks similar can differ in content, rights, build, platform, applicant, operator, and readiness.
The list also says nothing about the international-storefront route. A studio serving Chinese-speaking Steam players globally is running a different project and should describe it accurately.
Return to the official record whenever you repeat a result
Check the NPPA imported online game approval index whenever you plan to repeat an approval claim. Follow the official result link and retain the date. State only what the record supports: the result was published, these details were disclosed, and every missing fact still needs evidence.