The split between the IOC and Saudi Arabia over the Olympic Esports Games project has exposed the fragility of an alliance that was meant to mark a turning point. What was presented as a twelve-year strategic collaboration, set to begin in 2025, has dissolved before it even began. A decision that not only ends an agreement but also raises a deeper question: is the Olympic movement ready to integrate esports under its banner? And conversely, are esports ready to coexist with Olympic values?
The answer, for now, remains uncertain. The rupture shows that neither the enthusiasm of a wealthy nation nor the institutional drive of the International Olympic Committee is enough. The link between video games and the Olympic movement requires more than funding and infrastructure; it needs cultural, technical, and ethical understanding. Esports operate in their own universe, where game developers, player communities, and commercial brands set the rules. The Olympic world, by contrast, is built on universal values, federative structures, anti-doping regulations, and a humanistic vision of sport. They come from different worlds.
A clash of cultures
The agreement with Saudi Arabia was intended to provide an ambitious platform for the launch of the Olympic Esports Games. The country had committed to staging a large-scale event, backed by significant investment and global projection. But disagreements arose early, revealing that both sides had different goals. The IOC seeks legitimacy — a narrative that fits esports within the framework of Olympic values — while Saudi Arabia aimed for visibility, international positioning, and alignment with a booming industry.
The result is that, as of today, the project lacks a host, a calendar, and an organizational structure. The IOC now faces the task of rebuilding its digital strategy from scratch, redefining what kinds of video games can be part of the Olympic ecosystem, and finding a governance model that ensures transparency, neutrality, and balance between competition and commerce.
Turning crisis into opportunity
This pause, however, doesn’t have to be negative. The Olympic movement has before it a historic opportunity to rethink its relationship with the digital world and with younger generations. Today’s youth no longer consume sports the way they once did, and esports represent their own language — a different way to compete, to interact, and to experience spectacle. If the IOC manages to embrace that reality without diluting its identity, it could open a new era of connection with younger audiences and with the future of sports entertainment.
What the IOC wants to avoid is for esports to become a mere marketing exercise or a superficial attempt to attract audiences without a deep understanding of the gaming ecosystem — a project that feels artificial, soulless, and lacking in credibility.
Finding balance
Esports are not the enemy of traditional sports. The key lies in finding a meeting point between digital passion and Olympic values, between the immediacy of gaming and the tradition of the Games. Technology and Olympism can coexist.
Perhaps the IOC needs more time, more dialogue, and more understanding of a universe that doesn’t follow classical hierarchies or federative structures — and perhaps the same is true in the other direction. The path forward may not be to replicate the Olympic Games, but to create a format of their own. Because one thing is clear: digital Olympism is still searching for its identity.
