The online gaming industry continues to expand, and some colleges now provide scholarships to talented e-athletes. But does competing in online games qualify as a sport? Two Choices advisers share their perspectives.
Many argue that esports undeniably fits the definition of a sport. It demands a combination of natural talent and honed skills, with individuals or teams competing against each other in a highly strategic and competitive environment designed to entertain audiences.
On the other hand, critics strongly oppose this notion, often insisting that the absence of significant physical activity disqualifies esports from being considered a sport in the traditional sense. A quick scroll through the comment sections of football club subreddits that have ventured into esports often highlights this divide — and underscores how much ground esports still needs to cover to gain widespread acceptance.
The debate ultimately hinges on how one defines “sport.” Does it require intense physical exertion to qualify? Can the swift movements of fingers on keyboards, controllers, and mice be considered physical effort? What about the role of muscle memory and rapid reaction times?
Criticism of esports as a sport often originates from proponents of traditional athletics. A notable example is British swimmer Sharron Davies, a gold medalist at the 1978 Commonwealth Games, who voiced her disapproval of esports being included as a pilot event at the 2022 Birmingham Commonwealth Games.
“We should focus on evolving [the Commonwealth Games] with physically active sports that inspire young people, not activities that involve sitting down and using just a few fingers,” Davies remarked, as quoted by the BBC.
The world of traditional sports has often struggled to fully grasp the concept of esports, a challenge that became evident when the Olympic Committee announced the Olympic Esports Series in March 2023. Instead of selecting well-established esports titles, the event showcased lesser-known virtual sports simulations, such as a niche mobile tennis game, sparking frustration and backlash from the esports community.
However, many prominent athletes have embraced esports with enthusiasm, lending their support to its growing legitimacy. Icons like David Beckham, Shaquille O’Neal, Aerial Powers, Neymar Jr., and others have actively championed esports, helping to bridge the gap and validate it as a significant force in the global sports landscape.
Traditional sports teams have also eagerly entered the esports arena. Numerous football clubs have announced their involvement in esports, while key franchises in leagues like the Overwatch League and Call of Duty League are owned by influential sports executives. Notable figures include Robert Kraft, CEO of the New England Patriots and owner of the Boston Uprising, and Jeff Wilpon, Executive Vice President of Sterling Equities and owner of the New York Excelsior.
These efforts are supported by esports industry leaders who argue that the lines between sports and esports are increasingly blurred. Lokesh Suji, Director of the Esports Federation of India and Vice President of the Asian Esports Federation, highlighted this sentiment, stating, “Esports has always deserved recognition as a legitimate sport due to the many similarities that place it on equal footing with traditional sports.”
The Indian government recently classified esports events as “multi-sport events,” paving the way for increased funding and investment. Suji emphasized that, like traditional sports, esports requires significant mental and physical abilities. Solo players need sharp reflexes, fine motor skills, and precise coordination, while teams rely on strategic planning, communication, teamwork, and analytical thinking to gain an edge over opponents.
Why does it matter?
But does it really matter if esports is officially classified as a sport? The answer is a resounding yes. How esports is labeled and recognized directly influences its regulation by governing bodies and authorities.
The Interactive Software Federation of Europe (ISFE), which represents video game publishers and national trade associations, highlights a key distinction: esports differs fundamentally from traditional sports because it revolves around privately owned intellectual property created by game publishers.
According to the ISFE, this uniqueness makes applying existing sports regulations problematic. They argue that traditional sports frameworks are ill-suited to the needs of esports, potentially leading to fragmented and ineffective regulatory measures.
“In traditional sports, the activity itself isn’t owned by anyone — it’s free from intellectual property rights, In esports, however, every game is owned by a company, and this fundamentally changes how the ecosystem operates. It’s a completely different framework, and applying traditional sports regulations simply doesn’t work in many ways.” explained Sergi Mesonero, Head of Esports at the ISFE.
If esports were to be governed under a copy-paste approach from sports regulations, it could disrupt essential operations managed by video game publishers. For instance, hosting online servers or adjusting game engine mechanics might face regulatory roadblocks, potentially impeding the functionality of esports. Such restrictions could influence publishers’ decisions on whether, how, and where to support esports, creating uncertainty for the industry’s growth.
The ISFE emphasized that treating esports differently from traditional sports in terms of regulation doesn’t diminish its skill or legitimacy. “We oppose classifying esports as a sport strictly from a regulatory standpoint — that doesn’t mean esports can’t be seen as a form of sport,” clarified Sergi Mesonero, Head of Esports at ISFE.
“The real issue arises from the confusion this classification creates, particularly among those unfamiliar with the unique nature of esports,” Mesonero added. “We’ve observed in many cases that the linguistic overlap leads people to assume that the esports ecosystem functions similarly to traditional sports, which is far from reality.”
Despite these distinctions, esports and its athletes have garnered official recognition from numerous governments worldwide, including those of the United States, China, South Korea, India, and others. This growing acknowledgment highlights esports’ global significance and the need for tailored approaches to its regulation.
As the esports industry evolves, centered around professional competitors—whether they’re called gamers, e-athletes, or cybercompetitors — battling it out in ever-larger and more elaborate media events, the debate over its legitimacy shows no signs of fading. However, with more nations crafting policies and regulations specifically tailored to esports, the language we use to discuss it — and how policymakers frame it — takes on increasing importance.
The article was prepared by esports experts from Cyber Sport.
Related Articles:
- Esports in Schools: Examining the Global Trend and Its Educational Implications
- The Impact of Professional Gamers on eSports Betting
