Article
Communication & Sport 2018, Vol. 6(4) 418-435 ª The Author(s) 2017 Intersections of Fandom Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav in the Age of Interactive DOI: 10.1177/2167479517727286 Media: eSports Fandom journals.sagepub.com/home/com as a Predictor of Traditional Sport Fandom
Kenon A. Brown1, Andrew C. Billings1, Breann Murphy1, and Luis Puesan2
Abstract This study focuses on comparing the uses sought and gratifications obtained when consuming media related to eSports and traditional sports; in doing so, relevant areas of overlap and distinction are ascertained. In all, more than 1,300 American eSports participants were queried as to their interest in both eSports and tradi- tional sports fan/followership. Results revealed that eSports participants sought out media for both eSports and traditional sports for similar motivations, specif- ically social sport, fanship, and Schwabism. However, it is the magnitude of the motives that truly set eSports fans apart, with participants showing far more dedication and desire to engage with eSport content than in any other realm of the traditional sporting arena.
Keywords eSports and traditional sports motivations, uses and gratifications, survey
1 The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA 2 University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
Corresponding Author: Kenon A. Brown, Plank Center for Public Relations Leadership, Alabama Program in Sports Communi- cation, The University of Alabama, 134 Reese Phifer Hall, Box 870172, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA. Email: [email protected] Brown et al. 419
As two of the most burgeoning subfields of communication, sport and gaming scholarship has seemingly jointly moved to the forefront of many discussions of media, spurred by the notion that the science of play should not be discounted in the shaping of modern human habits (Billings, 2017). Rapidly expanding mobile media options have continued the mainstreaming of fandom via everything from fantasy sport to YouTube video productions, blurring the lines between spectator and per- former (Bowman & Cranmer, 2014). At the nexus of this gaming and sports focus is the rapidly ascending world of eSports. With roots embedded in the mainstreaming of gaming as early as the 1970s, enhanced Internet speed and access has caused the burgeoning industry to excel, with over 205 million people participating (Cassel- man, 2015); while selling out professional sporting arenas for major competitions (Carr, 2016), eSports now is a global player in the digital gaming marketplace. eSports has existed in some form for many decades (via closed online competitions as well as programs such as Entertainment and Sports Programming Network [ESPN]’s Madden Nation), yet, as Peckham (2016) illuminates, eSports now occu- pies spaces familiar to the traditional sports fan, with ESPN and Turner Broadcasting serving as exemplars of recent major investment in rendering competitions to the masses. Many in the popular press (see Fischer, 2017) are actively attempting to explicate the manner in which eSports does (or does not) fit into traditional sport spaces, leading to, for instance, an entire panel being dedicated to the subject at South by Southwest 2017. The similarities are evident, as millions of people become fans of premier players within various eSports game platforms, yet most avid eSports play- ers and followers are not followers of traditional sports as unpacked in a variety of sports media products (Aaron, 2015). The constituencies for both sports and eSports fans number in the hundreds of millions—if not more—making discerning the commonalities (or lack thereof) pertinent to understanding the vast and expanding digital gaming space. This study focuses on the uses sought and gratifications obtained within each of these two groups; in doing so, relevant areas of overlap and distinction are ascertained. In all, more than 1,300 American eSports participants were queried as to their interest in both eSports and traditional sports fan/follower- ship. As such, an important delineation is offered, showing that while both are enacting fandom in similar manners, the reasons why they opt to consume media to advance their fandom is demonstrably different.
Literature Review Before delving into the intricate world of eSports fandom, one must understand the approach endorsed while discerning motivations for fandom—and the degree in which they do or do not match with traditional sport identification and followership. Given that the focus of this study is on reasons for seeking a given form of media content, the uses and gratifications approach (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973) appears most pertinent to the task at hand. As originally conceived, the approach is 420 Communication & Sport 6(4) used to illuminate the reasons why one opts to consume different media options, bifurcating such decisions between uses sought and gratifications obtained within the formulation of a given media choice. Katz and Blumler (1974) contend that this approach is undergirded by three primary assumptions, each of which are potentially quite pertinent to eSports interests: Audiences are (a) goal oriented in their behavior, (b) active in their media use, and (c) aware of their needs and use specific media to gratify those needs. Such principles have been applied in a variety of contexts related to sport (Clavio & Kian, 2010), mobile/social media (Billings, Qiao, Conlin, & Nie, 2017), and the fantasy games that percolate from such competitions (Spinda, 2016). Nevertheless, eSports motivations have not been interrogated via a similar lens. Once considering that five reasons persist to explain why people opt for one form of media over another (Windahl, 1981), such motivations can be applied to the context of the relatively new world of eSport. Such decisions are rooted in psychol- ogy (Rubin, 1994; Ruggiero, 2000) and are used to explain how people navigate their social world. One can quickly surmise relationships between eSports and traditional sport fandom based on the aforementioned decisions: Both groups would seemingly be motivated by escape, relaxation, and diversion mechanisms exempli- fied by broader notions of gaming, for instance. However, the immense history of traditional sport runs in stark contrast to the history of eSports; one can grow up with embedded, tacit understandings of the importance and relevance of sport, yet the same cannot be said of eSports for all but the youngest of people who call themselves eSports fans. To wit, one may have shared memories of hundreds of sports game viewings (live and mediated) with family and friends, yet youth are just as likely to use eSport as a vehicle for seeking traditional sport fanship as they are to use to traditional sport fanship as a gateway into the eSports world, given that both have established underpinnings over several decades that envelope one’s entire life. Thus, it is crucial to understand the history of eSport before one can place it within the context of its relationship (or, often, lack thereof) with traditional sports fanship. Raney (2006) claims that traditional-mediated sports viewing is “more than an ignoble, and potentially [is] a beneficial, human pursuit” (p. 327), positing many motivations for sports fandom, ranging from eustress to mood management to the desire for community building. All of these motivations seemingly have potential relationships with eSports fandom, particularly in an age of sports media in which simultaneous screens and the expansion of the definition of sport (see Billings & Brown, 2017) dictate a modern evolution of what constitutes sport as well as what fans will do to consume it in myriad forms. eSports: A History With an origin tracing to October 19, 1972, when the first video game competition occurred at Stanford University (Baker, 2016), electronic sports (dubbed eSports) steadily gained market space, with exponential growth happening over the last decade. Eight years later, the first large-scale video game competition attracted, Brown et al. 421 overall, 10,000 participants when Atari held the Space Invaders Championship in New York City (Players Guide, 1982). The evolution of eSports can be traced to two distinct periods: (a) arcade and (b) Internet eras (Lee & Schoenstedt, 2011). During the arcade era (i.e., 1980–1990), eSport competitions regularly produced record-breaking performances in games such as Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, Jr., Centipede, and Burger Time (Ramsey, 2015), becoming a legitimate sport by having a centralized governing body, formal record keeping, set guidelines, and the promotion and encouragement of fair competition (Borowy & Jin, 2013). The 1990s featured the rise of the Internet and local area network (LAN) technology, allowing people to connect online while replacing consoles (Griffiths, Davies, & Chappell, 2003). LAN events were a place where gamers would link their PCs within a high-speed LAN, so they could play together, making eSports a social activity, pitting one group against the other (Jansz & Martens, 2005). Video games and competitions were, thus, exponentially more accessible as they eventually migrated almost entirely online. Ultimately, large eSport tournaments (e.g., 1990 Nintendo World Champion- ships) started to occur in the United States. The 1990 Nintendo World Champion- ships was played on the Nintendo Entertainment System, traversing 29 international cities (Pitcher, 2014). The format in which the championship was conducted was in-person qualifiers at various locations with three age categories in which participants could compete (i.e., 11 and below, 12–17, and 18 and above; Whiteman, 2008). Competitors had to achieve a high score according to a custom cumulative scoring formula in Super Mario Bros., Rad Racer,andTetris within a time limit of 6 min and 21 s (Nintendoplayer, n.d.). In 1994, Nintendo held a second World Championship called Nintendo PowerFest ‘94, played on the Super Nintendo Entertainment System (SNES), while Blockbuster Video hosted their own World Video Game Championships, sponsored by both Nintendo and Game- Pro magazine (Ganos, 2015). Other countries were also eligible to compete in the World Game Championships for Blockbuster with competitors hailing from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Chile (Lampbane, 2006). Still, none of these tournaments used any Internet-based gaming platform that typifies today’s prevalence of eSports. One could argue that the first “true” eSport competition was 1997s Red Annihila- tion tournament for Quake (Nagpa, 2015), a first-person shooter (FPS) game draw- ing over 2,000 participants (Jansz & Martens, 2005). Unlike the Nintendo tournaments, where qualifiers were done in person, the 1997 Red Annihilation tournament required online qualifiers. Shortly afterward, other independent entities began working with a wide range of corporations to establish eSport tournaments and circuits. The genre of the games was primarily FPS games titled Counter-Strike and Quake or multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) such as Warcraft. Also during the latter half of the 1990s, yearly conventions were formed, organized, and held for video games such as Quake. For example, Quakecon (n.d.) remains a steady facet of the industry, meeting annually for over 20 years in Dallas, TX. 422 Communication & Sport 6(4)
At the turn of the 21st century, eSports grew tremendously by increasing the number of global entities in competitions (e.g., the World Cyber Games, Intel Extreme Masters, and Major League Gaming); in the year 2000, there were 49 tournaments with the average professional player earning US$3,061 annually through tournament awards (eSports Earnings, 2000). South Korea took the concept of eSports to new heights, embracing it within popular culture. In an attempt to grow the culture of eSports, the South Korean government created the Korean eSports Association in 2000 (2013), a department embedded in South Korea’s Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism agency and hastened by massive Internet bandwidth growth (Huhh, 2007). PC bangs, a place where South Koreans rent time to play on a computer, were fundamental in growing eSports, becoming social spaces where interaction and fandom could emerge (Huhh, 2007) by placing a human face to people from this virtual world (Huhh, 2007). In the second decade of the 21st century, the popularity and emergence of online streaming software hastened rapid eSports growth. Twitch, launched in 2011, was the main provider for eSport competitions shown online, as it was (and is) free for everyone as well as the most common way everyone watched eSports (Twitch, 2016). In 2013, users spent over 12 billion min on Twitch watching eSports (O’Neill, 2014), most notably League of Legends (LoL) and Dota 2. Due to the success and profitability of Twitch, a variety of competitors emerged including Beam.pro, Azu- bu.tv, and Hitbox.tv. LoL, currently the most popular eSport, is an example which provides a context to the growth of eSports globally. In 2011, they surpassed 15 million players and over 1 million matches played daily (Riot, 2011). By 2014, that number rose to 67 million monthly and over 27 million daily users (Riot, 2014). In 2016, LoL achieved an all- time high of 100 million active monthly users just 5 years after they had hit 1% of that total (Tassi, 2016). Today, LoL has 12 different professional circuits worldwide with high viewership ratings. In 2016, the LoL World Championship offered over 370 million total hours of live eSports available to watch during a 15-day period (Riot, 2016a), rendered in over 23 broadcasts and 18 different languages (Riot, 2016a). Additionally, LoL fans watched over 60 billion game min on Twitch (Stei- ner, 2017). Toward the end of 2016, traditional sports organizations such as the Major League Baseball (MLB) and the National Basketball Association (NBA) entered the eSport scene, embracing the inevitable mainstreaming of the competi- tions based on astounding viewership, followership, and logged hours. In September 2016, the Philadelphia 76ers, an NBA team, acquired, merged, and now manage two eSport teams (NBA, 2016). Moreover, BAMTech, a company owned by MLB who produces video streaming and technology services for MLB, are contractually obli- gated to pay at minimum US$300 million to Riot games until 2023 (Kwilinski, 2016), funding the streaming rights to LoL. The online gaming industry continues to see rapid growth. In 2016, SuperData confirmed the eSports market is worth US$892 million and is expected to reach US$1.23 billion by 2019 (Minotti, 2016). The market in Asia is currently the largest Brown et al. 423 with a value of US$328 million (Minotti, 2016), followed closely by North America and Europe which come in second and third, respectively. As for viewership, there were an estimated 214 million self-identified eSports fans in 2016 with an expected escalation to over 303 million by 2019 (Minotti, 2016). In the United States, eSports viewers are predominantly male and under 25 years of age, a figure roughly repre- sentative of the estimated 85% of men (61% of them aged 25 or younger) in the country who participate in online games (Minotti, 2016). Through initial glances at these calculations, one can comprehend how eSports is currently in transition from an emerging market to becoming an established one (Minotti, 2016). Overall, eSports has changed greatly from tournaments for US$5,000 and in small convention centers to now selling out Olympic Stadiums and massive arenas such as the L.A. Staples Center and Madison Square Garden, with millions of dollars offered in prize money (Gilbert, 2015; Guzman, 2015). Even that live participation and prize money are dwarfed by the sheer magnitude of consumption minutes, now measured in terms of hundreds of billions of content viewing each year.
Intersections Between Traditional Sports and eSports The world of traditional sports constructs an experience in which a culture is formed where loyal fans are able to show support for their team through their words and actions. For example, fans may wear specific gear or clothing representing the logo of their favorite team or the number or image of their favorite player. Although these actions may be done in stadiums or at sports events, spectators can further show their team support either in online communities or postings on social media sites, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, converging in-person and online interactions for sports teams. Through social media, athletes can also achieve celebrity-like status. For example, the more followers a player has on Twitter, the higher the possibility of achieving more popularity and monetary rewards (Li & Huang, 2014). In eSports, the influence of professional teams on players and spectators is similar in many ways. For example, professional eSports teams develop team logos that both the players and spectators wear during matches and other-related events (Thompson & Cake, 2016). Furthermore, since there is growing consumer interest in this area, eSports often act as outlets for prominent companies similar to traditional sports. For example, companies such as Monster and Red Bull participate in supply drops— bonuses that aid participants in a variety of manners during matches—as a way of fusing their brands within games (Thompson & Cake, 2016). eSports is also a way for gamers to increase profits and recognition. For example, in 2014, an international tournament promoted by Dota 2 had a prize pool of US$10 million (Lahlou, 2014). Additionally, the tournament was held in a sold-out stadium in Seattle and broadcasted on ESPN (Lahlou, 2014). ESPN also dedicates an increas- ing number of hours in its broadcasting to eSports (Gaudiosi, 2016). Although a cable subscription is expected for that type of viewership, similar events are mostly held over online platforms, where spectators can view the tournaments for free 424 Communication & Sport 6(4)
(Lahlou, 2014), increasing the availability of eSports to audiences by allowing them to be more accessible to both players and spectators—again similar to traditional sport fandom. ESPN has also added a platform on its website specifically dedicated to news related to eSports to increase its reach to audiences (Gaudiosi, 2016), while Turner Sports has enacted similar entanglement between traditional and eSports digital offerings at even larger magnitudes. Even the most recent 2016 Olympic Games conducted an eGames Showcase (Riot, 2016), a 2-day event taking place at the British House in the Parque Lage mansion in August 2016. The first day consisted of players competing in Brazil in various exhibition matches, while the second day showcased top gamers from dif- ferent countries in a double elimination tournament of Nintendo’s Super Smash Bros. The top gamer was awarded a gold medal, with the second place finisher receiving a silver medal and the third a bronze medal, mimicking traditional Olym- pic competitions. Before the games, eGames founder and Chief Executive Chester King clearly indicated the eSports tournaments were not meant to take away from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) or traditional sports but instead were aimed at recognizing the 115 million people that competitively play games around the world (Bevins & Dave, 2016). King also added the IOC allowed him to use the moniker “eGames” (Bevins & Dave, 2016). The competitive nature of eSports also intertwines with consumption and prac- tical uses. The spectacle of gaming tournaments has been increasing the practice of not only watching the games but also stressing the need for the governing of eSports to institutionalize practices (Seo & Jung, 2014). As in traditional sports, rivalries are also forming between eSports teams, bolstering the competitiveness of these games. With the increase in competition, there is a greater need, or peer pressure (Lee & Schoenstedt, 2011), for gamers and players alike to develop better computer gaming skills. In response to this instance, brands, such as Red Bull, are also going one step further and developing technical training labs for eSports players to improve their skills (Thompson & Cake, 2016). Because of the young audience that eSports attracts, it would be advantageous to understand the rationales behind eSports media use and the similarities with reasons for traditional sports consumption. Defining those rationales would help eSports organizations attract a more diverse audience; moreover, traditional sport organiza- tions could learn how to attract a passionate, niche audience as well. Therefore, this study examines the similarities and differences in eSports participants’ motivations behind participating in both eSports and traditional sports media consumption. Con- sequently, the following research questions are proposed:
Research Question 1: What motivations drive eSports participants’ consump- tion of eSports-related media? Research Question 2: What motivations drive eSports participants’ consump- tion of traditional sports-related media? Brown et al. 425
Research Question 3: To what degree will fans’ uses and gratifications toward consuming eSports-related media and traditional sports-related media differ? Research Question 4: Will (a) participation in and (b) media consumption of a particular genre of eSports predict overall consumption of eSports-related media? Research Question 5: Will (a) participation in and (b) media consumption of a particular genre of eSports predict overall consumption of traditional sports- related media?
Method To better understand the intersections of eSports and traditional sports media con- sumption, a survey of active eSports participants in the United States (defined as anyone who reported having played eSports in the last 6 months) was distributed through Qualtrics, an online survey and data management software. Participants were recruited using a convenience sample of members of several eSports-related forums. The survey provided measures related to uses and gratifications, consump- tion of both types of eSports-related and traditional sports-related media, and demo- graphic information.
Participants A sample of 1,319 eSports participants was recruited. The sample consisted of 1,291 males (97.9%) and 28 females (2.1%). The sample was predominately Caucasian (860 participants, 65.2%), with Asian (201 participants, 15.2%) and Hispanic (139 participants, 10.5%) being the highest represented minority groups. The mean age of the respondents was 21.67 years (SD ¼ 4.04). The majority of respondents lived in suburban areas (738 respondents, 56%), with 447 respondents (33.9%) living in urban areas and 134 respondents (10.2) in rural areas.
Variables and Measurement To measure consumption of both eSports and traditional sports media, participants were asked how many hours per week they (a) consume eSports-related media and (b) consume traditional sports media using a series of open-ended questions. Parti- cipants were asked about consumption of both types of sports using (a) print media, (b) podcasts and streaming video, (c) radio, (d) social media, (e) television, and (f) websites and blogs not used for streaming video. Consumption was also inquired about based on genre of eSports material using similar items. Participants were asked about their consumption of five specific genres: (a) FPS (e.g., Call of Duty), (b) massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG; e.g., World of 426 Communication & Sport 6(4)
Warcraft), (c) fighting (e.g., Street Fighter V), (d) sports (e.g., Madden NFL 17), and (e) MOBA (e.g., LoL). These genres were represented in the top 100 games in eSports based on prize money (eSports Earnings, 2017). Despite the sample being heavily male, gender did not have a significant effect on consumption hours for eSports-related media (including watching competitions and ancillary media cover- age on all available platforms; Mtotal ¼ 16.25, SDtotal ¼ 18.44, t ¼ 0.399, p ¼ .69) or traditional sports-related media (Mtotal ¼ 6.92, SDtotal ¼ 13.29, t ¼ 1.217, p ¼ .224). To measure uses and gratifications, participants were asked to identify their level of agreement or disagreement to statements using a 7-point Likert-type scale (anchored by 1 ¼ strongly disagree and 7 ¼ strongly agree). Items were adapted primarily from Billings and Ruihley’s (2013, 2014) analyses of traditional sport and fantasy sport motivations for play, as these items appeared most applicable to the eSport player experience. The following motivations were measured (foundational research citation included):