Is the Olympic Esports Journey Finally Coming to a Close?

The esports community has largely shrugged off the news that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has quietly sidelined esports, as first reported by a Japanese news outlet. This shift, driven by current president Kirsty Coventry’s preference for traditional sports, caps nearly a decade of inconsistent engagement with the esports scene.

Initially, the esports industry was invited to engage with the Olympic Movement, but most key players were left out of the conversation. The term “esports” was even avoided for a time, replaced by “virtual sports,” until the establishment of the Olympic Esports Games brand, which ultimately fizzled out just over a year later.

This effort was aimed at drawing in new audiences to the Olympics, but like many ventures into esports, it was hampered by the unrealistic expectations set during the competitive gaming boom of the 2010s. The rapid growth of esports, fueled by the rise of online streaming and free-to-play models, masked ongoing structural issues and low revenue that continue to affect the industry. The Olympic Movement’s concerns—such as violent content, commercial interests, and intellectual property rights—were glaringly apparent.

The sentiment that “esports doesn’t need the Olympics, it’s the other way around” became a common refrain, though it depends on your viewpoint. Popular esports titles would feel out of place in the Summer or Winter Games, leaving casual viewers confused and only drawn in by national pride. The Esports Nations Cup is likely to fill the void left by the Olympics.

The complexities of the global sports governance system and its politics made the idea of an esports Olympics a monumental challenge. The IOC operates under a foundational document that outlines the organization and functioning of the Olympic Movement, including strict rules about which entities can be recognized as governing bodies for sports—exclusively granted to international federations.

A unique challenge for esports lies in the IOC’s mission to promote a “peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity,” which complicates the acceptance of games with violent themes. While IOC members have heard arguments about the existence of combat sports and the origins of some Olympic events in lethal arts, the line drawn by the IOC remains ambiguous. Games like Counter-Strike are clearly out, but the fantasy elements of League of Legends or the sci-fi combat of StarCraft present a gray area. Removing terms like “double kill” would feel like erasing a part of gaming culture.

The lackluster audience engagement for events featuring simulated sports—despite the IOC’s attempts to spin the metrics—highlights that modern games are deeply rooted in a long history of gaming genres. Multiplayer online battle arenas (MOBAs) and first-person shooters (FPS) share lineage with strategy and role-playing games, and the unique design choices of developers are often overshadowed by the broader context of gaming as a medium.

During my time in the gaming industry, I learned that even universally accepted games like Street Fighter and Rocket League were dismissed as “too unrealistic” for Olympic consideration. The IOC’s focus on promoting traditional sports explains why international federations sought to digitize their offerings. The notion that IOC members are uninterested in video games doesn’t hold up, especially since the Olympic Esports Games project received unanimous approval ahead of the 2024 Paris Games.

As Takashi Kiso pointed out in a recent social media post, the biggest hurdle to incorporating video games into the Olympics is the issue of rule-making and publisher oversight. There is no international governing body for esports, and the classification of esports as a sport often serves more for funding and recognition than for superficial status.

While enthusiasm for an esports Olympics may have been limited, the pursuit of one has had tangible policy effects. National Olympic Committees from various countries have recognized esports, and in places where esports is officially classified as a sport, the promise of an Olympic Esports Games has played a significant role in advocacy efforts.

In contrast to the IOC’s stance, the Asian Games will feature esports as a medal event for the second time later this year. This multi-sport event, while IOC-sanctioned, is not strictly bound by the Olympic charter, allowing games like League of Legends, Honor of Kings, and PUBG Mobile to return with national teams. This event serves as a model for what the IOC could not achieve, showcasing strong viewership and attendance, reflecting differing cultural attitudes toward esports.

Since the announcement, Kirsty Coventry has stated that her office’s work on esports is “very much alive.” She plans to present a new strategy to the executive board after June, which offers hope for those wishing to keep the Olympic flame for esports alive. However, the fundamental disconnect between video game products and sports politics is unlikely to be resolved quickly.

For now, we can still enjoy the concept of “virtual taekwondo.”