All Things Esports: India's $1.65 Billion Opportunity and the Road Ahead

The first recorded video game competition took place on October 19, 1972 at Stanford University. The prize was a year's subscription to Rolling Stone. Today, esports is a $1.65 billion global industry with an audience exceeding 500 million — larger than most traditional sports. Countries including South Korea, Germany, Brazil and South Africa have formally classified esports as a sport, with athlete visas, regulatory frameworks, and financial incentives to match. The first Olympic Esports Games are scheduled for Riyadh in 2027.

India won a bronze medal at the 2018 Asian Games in esports. We have vibrant tournaments — ESL India Premiership, COBX Masters, UCypher. We have over 400 million gamers, the second-largest user base globally. And yet we still do not have a coherent regulatory framework for esports as a sport. That is the gap this piece addresses.

Why Esports Is Different from Other Gaming

The most important thing to understand about esports regulation is that esports is structurally different from real money gaming, fantasy sports, and casual gaming. Esports involves organised, competitive video gaming — individuals or teams competing in structured leagues and tournaments governed by pre-defined rules. The business model is built on prize pools, sponsorships, media rights, and merchandise — not on monetary stakes from participants. This distinction matters enormously for regulation: esports is closer to cricket or football than to a casino.

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this recognition globally. When traditional live sports went dark, esports continued — online, viewable, monetisable. Broadcasters, sponsors, and investors who had never previously looked at esports discovered an audience that was engaged, young, and global. India was no exception. The pandemic's acceleration of esports in India cannot be overstated.

The Publisher-Ownership Problem

What makes esports governance uniquely complex is publisher ownership. In cricket, no private company owns the game of cricket. In esports, Riot Games owns League of Legends. Valve owns Dota 2. Krafton owns BGMI. Any regulatory framework for esports must navigate the reality that the intellectual property underlying the competition belongs to private entities, not to sporting federations or governments. This is not a problem that India invented — it is a global challenge. But it means that a government body cannot simply declare itself the regulator of League of Legends tournaments without Riot Games' cooperation.

The practical implication is that India's esports governance framework must be built in partnership with publishers, not imposed on them. The global esports integrity body ESIC offers a ready-made model — a publisher-compatible integrity framework that can be adopted or adapted by national federations with publisher cooperation.

What a Credible Indian Framework Needs

A credible Indian esports framework needs five things. First, formal recognition — esports should be recognised as a sport under the National Sports Governance Act and brought within the MYAS mandate, enabling athlete protections, anti-doping compliance, and international representation pathways. Second, federation recognition — a single recognised national federation for esports, capable of governing multiple game titles, liaising with publishers, and managing India's international representation. Third, anti-cheating and integrity standards — esports has specific integrity challenges including match manipulation, account sharing, and software exploitation that require bespoke protocols beyond traditional sports governance. Fourth, athlete welfare provisions — professional esports athletes face career trajectories that peak early and involve intense physical strain (particularly eye and musculoskeletal strain) that traditional sports welfare frameworks do not address. Fifth, a pilot national league — a government-endorsed National Esports League, operating across states and universities, would serve as a proof-of-concept for federated governance and create the institutional experience India needs before hosting international esports events.

Conclusion

India's esports ecosystem is growing with or without a legal framework. The question is whether that growth will be structured, safe, and globally respected — or chaotic, exploitative, and internationally uncompetitive. With the Olympic Esports Games approaching and the 2036 Olympic hosting bid creating a unique moment of sporting ambition, India has both the incentive and the opportunity to get this right. The window is open. It will not stay open indefinitely.