IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/cieodp/2011_008.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Blessings of Vintage: Exploring Technological Change made by Users of Discontinued Home Video Games Hardware

Author

Listed:

Abstract

The paper analyses the relation between use and technological change, emphasising three points that are not usually mentioned in the literature: the need to study technologies and products beyond the typical Product Life Cycle model, the need to study the role of users as agents of technological change, and the need to study technology “in use”, and not only new and upcoming technologies. Based on those premises, an empirical study of the home video games industry was conducted, combing qualitative and quantitative research activities through the “crystallisation” technique. The qualitative component was used to analyse online communities of users that perform technological changes to discontinued home video games hardware (modders) and their activities. The qualitative component comprised an online questionnaire to 20 users. Results confirm that “old” technologies continue to exist and to be improved long after they are discontinued, due to users’ technological changes. These technological changes are complex processes, done through incremental steps, on an individual learning by doing basis, within a context of information sharing, and support within the communities. Although relevant from a technical point of view, the outcomes do not feedback into the innovation processes of companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Graça, Jorge, 2011. "The Blessings of Vintage: Exploring Technological Change made by Users of Discontinued Home Video Games Hardware," Spatial and Organizational Dynamics Discussion Papers 2011-8, CIEO-Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, University of Algarve.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:cieodp:2011_008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cieo.pt/discussionpapers/7/article4.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Archibugi, Daniele & Lundvall, Bengt-Ake (ed.), 2001. "The Globalizing Learning Economy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199241095.
    2. Henderson, Rebecca, 1995. "Of life cycles real and imaginary: The unexpectedly long old age of optical lithography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 631-643, July.
    3. Matthew T. Clements & Hiroshi Ohashi, 2005. "Indirect Network Effects And The Product Cycle: Video Games In The U.S., 1994–2002," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 515-542, December.
    4. David S. Evans & Andrei Hagiu & Richard Schmalensee, 2008. "Invisible Engines: How Software Platforms Drive Innovation and Transform Industries," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262550687, April.
    5. Bengt-ake Lundvall & Bjorn Johnson, 1994. "The Learning Economy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 23-42.
    6. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    7. Dasgupta,Partha & Stoneman,Paul (ed.), 2005. "Economic Policy and Technological Performance," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521022217, January.
    8. Klepper, Steven, 1997. "Industry Life Cycles," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 145-181.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    10. Raymond Vernon, 1966. "International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 80(2), pages 190-207.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marlene O’Sullivan, 2020. "Industrial life cycle: relevance of national markets in the development of new industries for energy technologies – the case of wind energy," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1063-1107, September.
    2. Huenteler, Joern & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Ossenbrink, Jan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Technology life-cycles in the energy sector — Technological characteristics and the role of deployment for innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 102-121.
    3. Tavassoli, Sam, 2015. "Innovation determinants over industry life cycle," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 18-32.
    4. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    5. Lionel Nesta & Vincent Mangematin, 2002. "Industry Life Cycle, Knowledge Generation and Technological Networks," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-03398092, HAL.
    6. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    7. Michaela Trippl & Markus Grillitsch & Arne Isaksen & Tanja Sinozic, 2015. "Perspectives on Cluster Evolution: Critical Review and Future Research Issues," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(10), pages 2028-2044, October.
    8. Mary Tripsas, 2008. "Customer preference discontinuities: a trigger for radical technological change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 79-97.
    9. Dijk van, M., 2003. "Industry Evolution in Developing Countries: the Indonesian Pulp and Paper Industry," Working Papers 03.02, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    10. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    11. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    12. Angel Sevil & Alfonso Cruz & Tomas Reyes & Roberto Vassolo, 2022. "When Being Large Is Not an Advantage: How Innovation Impacts the Sustainability of Firm Performance in Natural Resource Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Karlsson, Charlie & Johansson, Börje, 2006. "Regional Development and Knowledge," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 76, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    14. Bos, Jaap W.B. & Economidou, Claire & Sanders, Mark W.J.L., 2013. "Innovation over the industry life-cycle: Evidence from EU manufacturing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 78-91.
    15. Schön, Benjamin & Pyka, Andreas, 2012. "A taxonomy of innovation networks," FZID Discussion Papers 42-2012, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    16. Joshua S. Gans & Michael Kearney & Erin L. Scott & Scott Stern, 2021. "Choosing Technology: An Entrepreneurial Strategy Approach," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 39-53, March.
    17. Rietveld, G.J. & Eggers, J.P., 2016. "Demand Heterogeneity and the Adoption of Platform Complements," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2016-003-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    18. Triulzi, G., 2014. "Technology life cycle and specialization patterns of latecomer countries: The case of the semiconductor industry," MERIT Working Papers 2014-012, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    19. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    20. François Lafond & Daniel Kim, 2019. "Long-run dynamics of the U.S. patent classification system," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 631-664, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    use; technological change; angry orphans; technological obsolescence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:cieodp:2011_008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Silvia Fernandes (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cialgpt.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.