From Space Invaders to App Ecosystems: The Killer App as a Platform Strategy
- May 11
- 21 min read
A “killer app” is a product, game, service, or software title that becomes so attractive that people buy the platform mainly to use it. This idea became clear in the early video game industry, especially through the success of Space Invaders. The game did more than entertain players. It helped show that software could create demand for hardware. A console, arcade machine, computer, smartphone, or streaming platform is not valuable only because of its technical design. It becomes valuable because of the content, services, and cultural meaning that are connected to it. This article explains the killer app as a platform strategy. It uses Space Invaders as an important historical example and connects it to later developments in gaming, personal computing, smartphones, streaming services, and app ecosystems. The article is written in simple English but follows an academic structure. It uses ideas from platform studies, Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, world-systems theory, and institutional isomorphism. The main argument is that killer apps are not only commercial successes. They also shape markets, user habits, institutional behavior, cultural value, and global technology competition. The article finds that killer apps work through a strong relationship between hardware, software, users, developers, and institutions. They create demand, reduce uncertainty, increase platform legitimacy, and build symbolic value around a technology. The conclusion suggests that the killer app remains central in the modern digital economy because every major platform still needs content, services, or experiences strong enough to make users choose one system over another.
Introduction
In the history of digital technology, some products are important not only because they sell well, but because they change the value of the system around them. A “killer app” is usually understood as a software product or content title that is so attractive that it encourages people to buy the hardware or platform needed to use it. In simple words, the product sells the platform.
This idea is now common in many industries. A video game can make people buy a console. A mobile application can make people choose one smartphone operating system over another. A streaming series can encourage people to subscribe to a platform. A business software package can convince companies to buy computers, servers, or cloud services. In each case, the platform becomes more valuable because of the content or software available on it.
One of the most important early examples is Space Invaders. First released as an arcade game in Japan in 1978, it became a major global success and helped build mass interest in electronic gaming. Its later appearance on home systems showed something very important: software could drive hardware sales. People did not want only a machine. They wanted access to a game experience. The hardware became a gateway to the content.
This point is central to platform strategy. A platform is not only a technical object. It is a system that connects different groups: users, developers, producers, advertisers, retailers, and institutions. A console needs games. A smartphone needs apps. A streaming platform needs films and series. A social platform needs users and creators. The platform becomes stronger when the content around it becomes more attractive.
The killer app is therefore not just a popular product. It is a strategic force. It helps a platform move from being one technical option among many to becoming a meaningful and desirable ecosystem. It gives users a reason to enter the system. It also gives other producers a reason to support the system. Once this begins, the platform can grow through network effects. More users attract more content. More content attracts more users.
This article examines the killer app as a platform strategy. It begins with Space Invaders as a historical example and then connects the idea to later digital ecosystems. The article uses three theoretical perspectives. First, Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital helps explain why some products become more than entertainment or utility. They become symbols of taste, belonging, and social value. Second, world-systems theory helps explain how successful platforms are connected to global patterns of production, distribution, and technological power. Third, institutional isomorphism explains why companies often imitate successful platform strategies once a killer app model becomes accepted in the industry.
The article argues that the killer app is important because it links technology with culture and market behavior. It shows that hardware alone rarely creates long-term value. Value comes from the interaction between the platform, the content, the users, and the wider social system. This relationship began to appear clearly in the early gaming industry and continues today in smartphones, streaming, cloud computing, artificial intelligence services, and digital marketplaces.
Background and Theoretical Framework
The Meaning of the Killer App
The term “killer app” became widely used in the computer and technology industries to describe an application that creates strong demand for a platform. It is “killer” not because it harms users, but because it can dominate attention, reshape markets, and make competing platforms look weaker. A killer app gives people a clear reason to adopt a technology.
A classic example often mentioned in computing history is the spreadsheet program VisiCalc, which helped drive demand for the Apple II computer among business users. In gaming, Space Invaders played a similar role. In later years, titles such as Super Mario Bros., Tetris, Doom, Halo, and Wii Sports also showed how software could help define the success of hardware platforms.
The killer app is important because it solves a common problem in technology markets. New platforms often face uncertainty. Users may ask: Why should I buy this? What can I do with it? Is it useful? Is it enjoyable? Is it worth the cost? A killer app answers these questions in a simple way. It gives the platform a clear purpose.
Without attractive software or content, hardware can feel empty. A game console without games is only a box. A smartphone without apps is only a communication device. A streaming platform without strong content is only a delivery system. The killer app fills the platform with meaning.
Space Invaders and the Early Platform Lesson
Space Invaders became a landmark because it showed the commercial power of interactive software. The game had simple rules, but it created deep engagement. Players controlled a laser cannon and tried to defeat rows of descending aliens. As the aliens moved faster, the pressure increased. The game used rhythm, tension, scoring, and repetition to create a strong loop of play.
This design was important. It encouraged players to continue. It made failure feel like a challenge rather than an ending. Players wanted to improve their scores. They wanted to play again. In arcades, this meant repeated coin use. In home gaming, it meant that access to the game could motivate hardware purchase.
The game also helped create a new cultural experience. It was not only a machine in an arcade. It became part of youth culture, leisure culture, and early digital popular culture. It showed that electronic games could become mass media. They could compete for attention with music, television, cinema, and other forms of entertainment.
From a platform strategy perspective, the lesson was powerful. The game made the machine more valuable. The hardware provided access, but the software created desire. This relationship later became a basic principle of the console industry.
Platform Strategy
A platform is a system that allows different groups to interact. In digital markets, platforms often connect users and producers. A game console connects players and game developers. A smartphone operating system connects users and app creators. A streaming service connects viewers and media producers. A marketplace connects buyers and sellers.
Platform strategy depends on managing these relationships. The platform owner must attract users, but users often come only when there is good content. At the same time, developers and content producers usually support platforms that already have users. This creates a difficult early-stage problem often called the “chicken and egg” problem. Which comes first: users or content?
The killer app helps solve this problem. It can attract users before the platform has a large ecosystem. Once users arrive, other developers see opportunity. They may begin creating more software or content for the platform. This increases the platform’s value and can lead to growth.
This is why exclusive content is so important in platform competition. A platform may not win only by having better technology. It may win because it has the game, the app, the film, the creator community, or the service that users want. The platform becomes a place where desired experiences happen.
Bourdieu: Cultural Capital and Symbolic Value
Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital helps explain why killer apps become socially meaningful. Cultural capital refers to knowledge, skills, tastes, and cultural goods that can give people status or social advantage. In the context of digital platforms, owning or using certain technologies can become part of identity.
A person who owned a popular console at a certain historical moment did not only own hardware. They had access to games that were discussed among friends, shown in magazines, and shared in social spaces. The same is true today when people use specific smartphones, apps, gaming platforms, or streaming services. These choices can communicate taste, belonging, and social position.
Space Invaders created cultural capital because it became a shared point of reference. Knowing the game, playing it well, and participating in arcade culture gave players a form of symbolic value. The game became part of a social world. It was not only about entertainment; it was about being connected to a new digital culture.
This helps explain why killer apps can be stronger than ordinary products. They create value beyond function. They become signs of modernity, skill, creativity, or belonging. A platform connected to such content gains symbolic power.
World-Systems Theory: Global Production and Platform Power
World-systems theory, associated with Immanuel Wallerstein, views the global economy as a structure of core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral regions. Core regions usually control advanced production, finance, technology, and global standards. Peripheral regions often provide labor, raw materials, or markets. Semi-peripheral regions occupy mixed positions.
This theory can be used to understand platform competition. Digital platforms are not neutral spaces. They are part of global economic power. The companies that control platforms often control standards, distribution channels, data flows, payment systems, and user access. A successful platform can extend the influence of firms and countries in the global economy.
The history of video games shows this clearly. Japanese companies became central actors in arcade and console gaming, especially from the late 1970s through the 1990s. American companies were also major players in computing, software, and later platform ecosystems. Global markets consumed these products, but the main control over design, intellectual property, and distribution often remained concentrated in powerful technological centers.
The killer app can therefore be seen as part of global platform power. A successful game or application can help a company enter international markets. It can create demand across borders. It can also shape cultural flows, as users around the world begin to consume similar software experiences.
Institutional Isomorphism: Why Firms Imitate Platform Success
Institutional isomorphism, developed by Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell, explains why organizations in the same field often become similar over time. They may imitate successful models, follow professional norms, or respond to regulatory and market pressure.
In platform industries, once companies saw that a major software title could sell hardware, many began to copy the strategy. Console companies invested in exclusive games. Computer companies promoted key applications. Smartphone companies built app stores. Streaming services created or purchased exclusive content. Each industry developed its own version of the killer app strategy.
This imitation is not accidental. Organizations copy models that seem legitimate and successful. If one company grows because of exclusive content, others may feel pressure to do the same. Over time, the killer app becomes an institutional expectation. A platform is expected to have strong exclusive or high-value content.
This helps explain why modern digital competition often looks similar across industries. Game platforms, streaming platforms, app stores, and even artificial intelligence platforms all try to build ecosystems around high-value use cases. The form changes, but the strategic logic remains similar.
Method
This article uses a qualitative conceptual method. It does not present new survey data or statistical testing. Instead, it builds an academic interpretation from historical examples, platform theory, and social theory. The purpose is to explain how the killer app functions as a platform strategy and why Space Invaders remains an important example.
The method has four parts.
First, the article uses historical interpretation. It treats Space Invaders as a key case in the early development of gaming platforms. The case is not examined only as a game, but as a product that helped reveal the relationship between software and hardware demand.
Second, the article uses comparative analysis. It compares the Space Invaders example with later platform industries, including home consoles, personal computers, smartphones, streaming services, and app ecosystems. This comparison shows that the killer app logic did not remain limited to arcade or console gaming. It became a general pattern in digital markets.
Third, the article uses theoretical analysis. Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital is used to explain symbolic value and user identity. World-systems theory is used to explain global platform power and unequal control over technology markets. Institutional isomorphism is used to explain why companies imitate successful platform strategies.
Fourth, the article uses interpretive synthesis. This means that the article brings different ideas together to produce a broader explanation. The goal is not to prove one narrow claim, but to create a clear framework for students, researchers, and practitioners who want to understand the killer app as a strategic and cultural phenomenon.
This method is suitable because the killer app is not only a technical issue. It is also economic, social, cultural, and institutional. A purely technical explanation would not be enough. The topic requires attention to markets, users, organizations, and global structures.
Analysis
Software as the Driver of Hardware Demand
The central lesson of the killer app is that software can sell hardware. This may sound simple today, but it was a major insight in the early history of digital platforms. Many people once understood machines mainly through their technical features: processor speed, memory, graphics, design, or price. These features are important, but they do not fully explain why users buy a platform.
Users usually buy technology because of what they can do with it. A console is valuable because it plays games. A smartphone is valuable because it gives access to communication, apps, media, payments, maps, and social networks. A computer is valuable because it runs software for work, creativity, learning, and entertainment.
Space Invaders made this point visible. The game created an experience that players wanted to repeat. When this experience became connected to specific machines, those machines gained value. The software gave the hardware a reason to exist in the user’s life.
This relationship is now central to platform strategy. Companies understand that hardware must be supported by a strong content or software ecosystem. In some industries, hardware may even be sold with low profit margins because the main value comes from software, subscriptions, licensing, advertising, or digital purchases.
The killer app turns the platform from a technical product into a desired environment. It helps users imagine how the platform fits into daily life.
The Arcade as an Early Platform Environment
Before home consoles became dominant, arcades were important spaces for digital play. They were not only places with machines. They were social environments where players watched each other, competed, learned, and developed gaming culture.
In this sense, the arcade was an early platform environment. The machine, the game, the player, the location owner, and the coin-based payment model all worked together. The value of the system came from interaction. A successful game brought players to the arcade. More players created atmosphere. This atmosphere made the arcade more attractive.
Space Invaders worked well in this environment because it had clear rules, visible progress, and strong replay value. A player could understand the game quickly, but mastering it required practice. The score system also made performance visible. This visibility created competition and social recognition.
Here Bourdieu’s idea of cultural capital is useful. Players who became skilled gained status in that local gaming field. Their knowledge and performance mattered. They could show skill in front of others. The game created a small but meaningful social hierarchy. Some players were beginners. Others were respected because of their scores and control.
The platform was therefore not only technical. It was social. The game produced value by creating a field of participation, competition, and recognition.
From Arcade Success to Home Console Strategy
The move from arcade machines to home consoles changed the business model but kept the platform logic. In the arcade, users paid per play. In the home, users bought hardware and then bought or accessed games. The key question became: what would convince someone to bring the platform into the home?
A killer app could answer this question. If a household wanted to play a specific game, the console became necessary. The console was no longer judged only as an electronic device. It became a doorway to a desired experience.
This pattern became central to the console wars of later decades. Companies competed not only through hardware power but through game libraries. Exclusive titles became strategic assets. A console with strong exclusive games could build loyalty even if competitors had similar or better technical specifications.
The platform owner also gained control over standards, licensing, and distribution. This allowed companies to shape the ecosystem. They could decide which games were approved, how developers participated, and how revenue was shared. The killer app helped attract users, but the wider platform structure helped keep them.
This shows an important point: the killer app may start platform growth, but ecosystem management sustains it. A single title can create attention. A strong library creates long-term value.
Personal Computers and Business Killer Apps
The killer app concept is not limited to gaming. In personal computing, business software played a similar role. Spreadsheet programs, word processors, database tools, and desktop publishing software helped make computers useful for offices, schools, and homes.
For many business users, the computer became valuable because of specific applications. A company might buy a computer because a spreadsheet program improved financial planning. A school might buy computers because educational software supported learning. A designer might choose a system because of creative software.
This shows that killer apps can create practical value as well as entertainment value. The emotional excitement of a game and the productivity value of a spreadsheet are different, but both can drive platform adoption.
In Bourdieu’s terms, business software also creates forms of capital. Users who master important software gain professional skills. These skills can improve job opportunities and workplace status. A platform becomes connected not only to entertainment but to career development and institutional legitimacy.
The platform then becomes part of education and professional training. Schools teach certain software because industries use it. Companies choose software because workers are trained in it. This creates a cycle of adoption.
Institutional isomorphism appears here. Organizations copy the technology choices of other organizations because those choices become standard. If many companies use a certain software platform, other companies may adopt it to appear professional, compatible, and modern.
Smartphones and the App Store Model
The smartphone is one of the clearest modern examples of platform strategy. A smartphone is hardware, but its value depends heavily on its operating system, app store, developer community, and service ecosystem.
In the early smartphone market, technical features mattered. Screen quality, battery life, camera performance, and design were important. But the app ecosystem became equally important. Users wanted access to messaging, maps, games, banking, transportation, media, shopping, health tools, and productivity apps.
In this context, the killer app became plural. Instead of one single application driving adoption, entire categories of apps created platform value. Social media apps, mobile games, navigation tools, and messaging services became central to user choice.
The app store model also changed the role of developers. Independent developers could create software for large user bases. Platform owners controlled the rules, but developers supplied much of the innovation. This made the platform more valuable without the platform owner producing every application directly.
Network effects became very strong. More users attracted more developers. More developers created more apps. More apps attracted more users. The platform became an ecosystem.
Bourdieu’s theory again helps explain symbolic value. Smartphones and apps became part of lifestyle and identity. The choice of device, apps, and digital habits can reflect taste, class position, professional role, and social belonging. The platform becomes part of personal presentation.
World-systems theory also matters. Smartphone platforms are global systems. Design, software control, intellectual property, manufacturing, raw materials, logistics, and markets are spread across the world. However, the highest levels of control often remain concentrated in powerful firms and regions. The app ecosystem may appear open, but it is governed by platform owners who set the rules of access.
Streaming Services and Content as the Killer App
Streaming services show another version of the same strategy. A streaming platform does not usually sell hardware directly, although it may be connected to smart TVs, mobile devices, or media players. Instead, it sells access. The platform’s value depends on content.
Here, the killer app may be a popular series, film, sports event, documentary, or exclusive media library. A viewer may subscribe to a service because of one specific show. Once inside the platform, the user may discover other content and continue subscribing.
This is very similar to the console model. The platform needs exclusive or attractive content to attract users. The difference is that the platform is now often subscription-based. The killer app does not only create a purchase; it creates recurring revenue.
Streaming platforms also show institutional isomorphism. Once one company succeeded with original exclusive content, others followed. Many platforms began investing heavily in original series, exclusive rights, and content libraries. The industry moved toward similar strategies because exclusive content became seen as necessary for legitimacy and competition.
This creates both opportunity and pressure. On one hand, users gain more content. On the other hand, content becomes fragmented across platforms. Users may need several subscriptions to access everything they want. Platform strategy can therefore create convenience within one ecosystem but complexity across the whole market.
Gaming Today: Ecosystems, Subscriptions, and Communities
Modern gaming has moved far beyond the early arcade machine. Today, gaming includes consoles, PCs, mobile phones, cloud gaming, streaming, esports, digital stores, downloadable content, subscriptions, and online communities.
Yet the killer app remains important. A major game can still sell consoles, attract subscribers, or define a platform identity. However, the meaning of a killer app has expanded. It may now be a game, a franchise, a live service, a creator platform, or a community.
Games are no longer always finished products sold once. Many are ongoing services. They receive updates, seasons, events, expansions, and online features. This means the killer app can continue creating platform value over time.
Community is also central. Players may choose platforms because their friends are there. This is a social network effect. A game becomes valuable not only because of its design but because of the people connected through it.
This is important for students to understand. Platform value is not only located in the object. It is located in relationships. A platform becomes powerful when it connects content, users, identity, payment, social life, and continuous engagement.
Cultural Capital and the Status of Platforms
Bourdieu’s framework helps show that killer apps create cultural meaning. People do not use platforms only for function. They also use them to participate in cultural fields.
In gaming, knowledge of certain titles can create belonging. In professional life, knowledge of certain software can create employability. In creative communities, access to certain tools can create artistic legitimacy. In streaming culture, watching certain shows can support social conversation.
A killer app therefore produces cultural capital. It gives users knowledge, experience, and references that matter in specific groups. This is one reason why platforms fight for iconic content. Iconic content does not only generate use. It creates cultural position.
The symbolic value of a platform can become self-reinforcing. If a platform is seen as the place where important content appears, users may treat it as more legitimate. Developers and creators may also prefer it because it carries prestige. This creates a cycle where cultural value supports economic value.
World-Systems Theory and Global Digital Dependency
World-systems theory allows us to ask a deeper question: who controls the platforms, and who mainly consumes them?
Killer apps can spread globally, but control over their platforms is often unequal. A game, app, or streaming service may reach users across many countries, but the ownership of intellectual property, data, infrastructure, and revenue flows may be concentrated in a smaller number of firms.
This matters because platforms shape not only markets but also culture. They influence what content is visible, what payment systems are used, what rules developers must follow, and what data is collected. Countries and firms that control platforms can influence global digital behavior.
In the early gaming industry, Japan and the United States played especially important roles. Later, South Korea, China, Europe, and other regions developed strong positions in parts of gaming, mobile technology, and digital media. Still, the global platform economy often shows unequal power relations.
For countries outside the main technology centers, the challenge is not only to consume platforms but also to build local content, local software skills, and local digital institutions. A local killer app can help a region gain visibility. However, it often still depends on global app stores, payment systems, cloud services, or distribution platforms.
This shows that the killer app is both an opportunity and a dependency. It can help new actors grow, but it may also strengthen existing platform owners.
Institutional Isomorphism and the Repetition of Strategy
Once the killer app model became successful, it spread across industries. Companies began to believe that every platform needed exclusive content, strong applications, or ecosystem lock-in. This is an example of institutional isomorphism.
There are three forms of isomorphism that can be seen here.
First, mimetic isomorphism happens when companies copy successful competitors under uncertainty. If one console succeeds because of exclusive games, others try to build exclusive libraries. If one streaming service succeeds with original series, others invest in original content.
Second, coercive isomorphism happens when market pressure, regulation, or platform rules force organizations to behave in similar ways. Developers may follow app store requirements because they need access to users. Media producers may adapt to streaming platform standards because distribution depends on them.
Third, normative isomorphism happens when professional communities develop shared beliefs about best practice. Technology managers, investors, designers, and marketers may all come to believe that platform ecosystems require killer apps, developer tools, and user lock-in. These ideas become part of professional knowledge.
As a result, the killer app is no longer only a product category. It becomes an institutional model. Companies are expected to search for one. Investors ask what the platform’s killer use case is. Users ask what makes the platform worth joining. Media coverage often looks for the one product that defines a system.
The Limits of the Killer App Strategy
Although killer apps can create major success, the strategy has limits. A platform cannot depend forever on one product. User attention changes. Competitors copy features. Technology improves. Cultural trends move.
A killer app may attract users, but poor platform management can lose them. Problems such as high prices, weak developer support, bad user experience, limited content variety, or unfair policies can damage the ecosystem.
There is also a risk of over-dependence. If a platform relies too much on one title or service, it becomes vulnerable. If the content loses popularity, the platform may suffer. A stronger strategy is to use the killer app as a starting point and then build a wider ecosystem.
Another limit is exclusion. Exclusive content may help platforms compete, but it can also divide users. People may need to buy several devices or subscriptions to access different content. This can create frustration and inequality in access.
There is also the question of creativity. If all companies imitate the same platform strategy, innovation may become narrow. Institutional isomorphism can reduce diversity because organizations copy what seems safe rather than exploring new models.
Findings
This article identifies seven main findings.
First, the killer app is best understood as a relationship, not only as a product. A game, application, or media title becomes a killer app when it changes the value of a platform. Its importance comes from its ability to connect user desire with platform adoption.
Second, Space Invaders is an important historical example because it showed that software could create strong demand for hardware. The game helped make clear that the machine was valuable because of the experience it provided.
Third, platform value depends on ecosystems. Hardware, software, users, developers, distributors, and institutions all contribute to platform success. A killer app can start demand, but long-term success requires ecosystem development.
Fourth, Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital helps explain why killer apps become socially meaningful. They create knowledge, status, identity, and belonging. Users do not only consume content; they participate in cultural fields.
Fifth, world-systems theory shows that killer apps and platforms are part of global power structures. Successful platforms can shape international markets, cultural flows, and economic dependency. Control over platforms often brings control over standards, data, revenue, and visibility.
Sixth, institutional isomorphism explains why the killer app strategy spreads. Once companies see that exclusive or high-value content can drive adoption, they imitate the model. This creates similar strategies across gaming, smartphones, streaming, and app ecosystems.
Seventh, the killer app remains relevant today, but its form has changed. It may be a single game, a software tool, a media series, a creator network, a subscription service, or a full app ecosystem. The basic logic remains the same: users choose platforms because of the experiences those platforms make possible.
Conclusion
The idea of the killer app remains one of the most useful ways to understand platform strategy. It explains why some technologies become successful while others fail, even when the technical differences are not always clear. Users rarely adopt platforms only because of hardware specifications. They adopt platforms because of what they can experience, create, watch, play, share, or achieve through them.
Space Invaders is important because it helped show this relationship early in the history of digital entertainment. The game demonstrated that software could sell hardware. It also showed that interactive content could create new cultural habits, new business models, and new forms of social value.
The same logic continues today. Game consoles depend on games. Smartphones depend on apps. Streaming services depend on content. Cloud platforms depend on useful services. Artificial intelligence platforms depend on powerful use cases. In every case, the platform needs something that makes users want to enter and remain inside the ecosystem.
Theoretical perspectives help deepen this understanding. Bourdieu shows that killer apps create cultural capital and symbolic value. World-systems theory shows that platforms are linked to global economic power and unequal control. Institutional isomorphism shows why firms copy successful platform models until they become industry norms.
For students, the key lesson is simple but important: technology does not succeed by hardware alone. A platform becomes powerful when it connects technology with meaningful content, user communities, cultural value, and institutional support. The killer app is the bridge between a technical system and a living ecosystem.
As digital markets continue to develop, the search for the next killer app will continue. But the deeper question is not only which product will become popular. The deeper question is how that product will reshape the platform around it, how it will influence user behavior, and how it will change the balance of power in the digital economy.
References
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). “The Forms of Capital.” In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood Press.
Cusumano, M. A., Gawer, A., & Yoffie, D. B. (2019). The Business of Platforms: Strategy in the Age of Digital Competition, Innovation, and Power. Harper Business.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Gawer, A. (Ed.). (2009). Platforms, Markets and Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2002). Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation. Harvard Business School Press.
Herman, L. (2016). Phoenix IV: The History of the Videogame Industry. Rolenta Press.
Kent, S. L. (2001). The Ultimate History of Video Games. Three Rivers Press.
Kline, S., Dyer-Witheford, N., & de Peuter, G. (2003). Digital Play: The Interaction of Technology, Culture, and Marketing. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Montfort, N., & Bogost, I. (2009). Racing the Beam: The Atari Video Computer System. MIT Press.
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003). “Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets.” Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029.
Schilling, M. A. (2003). “Technological Leapfrogging: Lessons from the U.S. Video Game Console Industry.” California Management Review, 45(3), 6–32.
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Academic Press.
Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Duke University Press.
Wolf, M. J. P. (Ed.). (2008). The Video Game Explosion: A History from PONG to PlayStation and Beyond. Greenwood Press.
Comments