The great divides of the global games industry

• “Divides are causing significant problems in some cases entrenching attitudes and realities that are holding the medium back”
• “The fewer borders we have and the more we instead share knowledge, experience and technology, the more potential there is for innovation”

Over the years, the video games industry has seen unprecedented growth, with a huge surge in popularity and profitability. But with this success, are we seeing a market that is becoming more fragmented? 

What gaming platform players use is already a defining factor of fragmentation. There are also further divides within these platforms, with various stores or launchers to download and play games from that want users to choose their service over another. 

Is this type of fragmentation inevitable, or is there a way to bridge the gap? In this guest article, Raptor PR’s founder and CEO, Rana Rahman, discusses these questions and explores whether or not fragmentation hinders the industry's potential for further growth.

Does division define the games industry and medium more than those of us who work in the space like to admit?

That’s almost certainly the case, and though it isn’t particularly popular or comfortable to talk about, in facing up to the reality of games’ great divisions, we can help supercharge the sector’s forward journey.

Over the decades, those of us lucky enough to work in the field have become well-versed in evangelising the medium’s merits, uniting in its defence and talking of the power of creative and technological collaboration. Those are not hollow sentiments, either. Games’ potential for all manner of positive impacts is striking, and collaboration is consistently a bedrock of those wonderful ramifications.

And yet, there are divisions that we can too often ignore or play down. Those divides are causing significant problems in some cases, entrenching attitudes and realities that are holding the medium back. None of us want to see that. So, let’s consider what those divides are and what might be gained from recognising their reality.

Understanding persistent divisions

One of the most obvious divisions that frames games is clearly platform. In fact, many of those divides are presently eroding, as traditional ‘walled garden’ platforms such as major consoles increasingly have no other option than to open up.

Platform exclusivity is increasingly a thing of the past, and we are starting to see discussions of digital storefronts like Epic Games Store and self-publishing powerhouses like itch.io having a place on Xbox. The old model that divided games around platforms could be seen as also on the way out.

And yet there’s mobile, which is still insanely seen as an outsider platform by many in the industry – or projected as a less creatively credible or authentic destination for gaming. When we see those attitudes coming from players, it is reasonable to attribute some of the mindset to platform loyalty, as stoked by marketers’ decades-long fostering of ‘console war’ mindsets. But it's much harder to fathom when it comes from the industry.

Consider that – 16 years after the arrival of the iPhone and the App Store – mobile games still only really see reviews and attention from specialist publications.

Meanwhile, in 2024, the BAFTA Games Awards, which strive to celebrate the broad medium’s merits, essentially entirely snubbed mobile. Only one game – Terra Nil – across dozens of nominations had any mobile presence.

And you won’t have to venture too far to find open attitudes in the sector asserting that making mobile titles is culturally lesser and inherently cynical. When you consider that mobile makes up about 49% of all games revenue globally, the division between it and other gaming forms seems rather extraordinary.

Elsewhere, web3 games are perceived as a homogenous group, proactively pushed away from other gaming forms, and expected to operate in isolation despite using the same tech, creative processes, and design philosophies.

Even in the collaborative era of user-generated content and communities influencing the design of games through models like early access, a fragmented industry that separates platforms and player bases still frames many publications, events, and awards shows.

Those things appear to directly contradict the video games industry’s standing as a future-facing, progressive and eagerly innovative place keen to welcome a broader sweep of underrepresented voices into the field so their stories can be shared.

It appears that – over time – it is all too easy for the once disruptive new guard of gaming to slip into the habits of an old guard, falling into the trap of innovation needing to be tempered by established conventions of authenticity and acceptance.

Symptoms of success?

In many ways, these divisions are a sign – or perhaps a symptom – of progress and growth. Relative aeons ago, the music industry grew so large and popular that it necessarily fragmented. We all surely agree that opera, punk and techno are equal examples of ‘music’.

And yet, they are served by their own labels, publications, stores, and venues. So perhaps fragmentation – and thus division – is an inevitable or even necessary symptom of growth?

At Raptor, we don’t think so. The games industry presently has a collective opportunity to reject the inevitability of following a path taken by so many other commercialised art forms. Because now is a time to push back against division.

The fewer borders we have, and the more we instead share knowledge, experience, and technology, the more potential there is for innovation, creativity, revenue, and environmental or societal impact.

Gaming can – and should – shape conventions in other industries. It's a beloved medium that deserves to continue its journey not just of growth but also of increasing breadth, with so many new forms now enchanting an increasingly rich mix of demographics. Those many gains are tremendous. To squander all that potential through forced divisions would be a terrible thing indeed.

Over in the realm of corporate innovation, where the world’s biggest companies wrangle with concepts to better efficiency and growth, the concept of ‘stovepiping’ describes the phenomena where, across the largest organisations, distinct departments too often exist in isolated vertical hierarchies, with little horizontal exchange of knowledge and ideas between those groups.

Stovepiping can limit innovation, revenue generation, impact, and expansion. And unfortunately, we are arguably starting to see that form of division constrains interplay between creatives and technologists currently spread across effective ‘silos’ such as PC, console, mobile, web3, industry, consumers, and so on.

Polarised thinking

Looking elsewhere, and particularly at the current state of conversations around global politics, stark warnings exist. Today, the polarisation of discussion is commonplace, with people commonly staking a flag at one of two extremes.

Social media’s rise – which has also significantly impacted games – surely has a large part to play. Unfortunately, polarisation and tribalism don’t tend to encourage progress.

Instead, increasingly combative sides become more entrenched in their views as a means to resist, breeding yet more polarisation, which limits the ability to pursue common goals, opportunities in the middle ground, and collective gains. It would be quite the exaggeration to say that is happening at any significant scale in games. But the lessons are clear.

Fortunately, the solutions here aren’t wildly complex. It starts with recognition of this reality. Games are a wonderful, collaborative space founded on bringing people together around play. However, enthusiastic recognition of that reality can and should coexist with identifying the emergence of increasing fragmentation.

Conversations around this can really start to inspire action.