遊戲產業的全球產值尚在不斷擴張，得益於技術的持續進步、Covid-19疫情的影響與元宇宙的興起，帶給遊戲產業龐大的潛力和商機，而龐大的遊戲產業又與網絡效應間存在密切關係，遊戲產業鏈上不同角色的遊戲公司透過維持或擴大網絡效應的影響來幫助自己達到用戶的擴大與營收的增長。本研究使用多個案研究法，分析與比較不同遊戲公司的商業模式與其展現的網絡效應，並以探討不同的遊戲公司如何強化其網絡效應為研究目的。
研究結果發現遊戲產業鏈上游端的遊戲引擎公司是透過為其用戶，也就是開發人員提供完整開發工具與資源支持來奠定自身的產業龍頭地位，並進一步強化網絡效應，吸引新的開發者使用其遊戲引擎，持續提升市場佔有率；產業鏈中下游端的遊戲製作公司則是透過自建遊戲平台，運用其豐富的大型多人遊戲資源與會員訂閱制度來強化網絡效應，吸引更多玩家的加入；跳脫傳統遊戲產業鏈的社交遊戲平台，同時服務平台兩邊的用戶，創作者與玩家，透過滿足雙方的需求來強化跨邊網絡效應，使平台不斷擴大。一間遊戲公司可能會同時存在多種網絡效應關係，也會有自然產生及人為創造的網絡效應，端看遊戲公司的商業模式與營運策略，不管是何種網絡效應關係，其成效與影響力皆需時間驗證，同時不斷調整，遊戲公司才能獲得網絡效應所帶來之不可限量的效益。

The global value of the gaming industry is continuously expanding, thanks to ongoing technological advancements, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the emergence of the metaverse. These factors bring immense potential and opportunities to the gaming industry. The gaming industry, in turn, has a close relationship with network effects. Different roles within the gaming industry ecosystem, leverage and expand the impact of network effects to achieve user growth and revenue growth. This study employs multiple case study methods to analyze and compare the business models of different game companies and the network effects they demonstrate. It explores how different game companies strengthen their network effects.
The results of the research finds that game engine companies who located at the upstream of the gaming industry, establish their industry-leading position by providing comprehensive development tools and resources to their users, the developers. They further enhance their network effects by attracting new developers to use their game engines, thus continuously increasing their market share. On the other hand, game developing and publishing companies, located at the downstream of the industry, strengthen their network effects by building the own game platform and utilizing abundant resources in large-scale multiplayer games and subscription systems to attract more players. Social gaming platform that break away from the traditional gaming industry ecosystem serve both sides of the platform, creators, and players. By satisfying the needs of both parties, they strengthen cross-side network effects, enabling the platform to continuously expand.
A game company can simultaneously experience different types of network effects, and there are also naturally generated and artificially created network effects, depending on the business model and operation strategy of the game company. No matter what kind of network effect relationship, its effectiveness and influence need to be verified and adjusted continuously in order for game companies to obtain the unlimited benefits brought by network effects.

吳勇, & 李倩. (2017). Web2. 0 環境下網絡效應對價值共創的影響機理研究. 科技進步與對策, 34(2), 25-31.
Afuah, A. (2013). Are network effects really all about size? The role of structure and conduct. 34(3), 257-273. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2013
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559. doi:https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573
Boudreau, K. J. (2012). Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom? An Early Look at Large Numbers of Software App Developers and Patterns of Innovation. Organization Science, 23(5), 1409-1427. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0678
Cennamo, C., & Santalo, J. (2013). Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. 34(11), 1331-1350. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2066
Eisenmann TR, Parker G, Alstyne M. (2006). Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard Business Review 84, 92–101.
Evans, D. S. 2009. “How Catalysts Ignite: The Economics of Platform-Based Start-Ups.” In Platforms, Markets and Innovation, edited by A. Gawer, 99–128. London: Edward Elgar Publishing
Karhu, K., Heiskala, M., Ritala, P., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2021). Platform Externalities: Beyond the N In Network Effects. In DRUID21 Conference, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Denmark October 18-20, 2021 [6068]
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1994). Systems Competition and Network Effects %J Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8(2), 93-115. doi:10.1257/jep.8.2.93
Kim, J.-H., et al. (2014). "Indirect network effects and the quality dimension: A look at the gaming industry." International Journal of Industrial Organization 37: 99-108., doi: https://0-doi-org.opac.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2014.08.005
Ojala, A., & Lyytinen, K. (2022). How do entrepreneurs create indirect network effects on digital platforms? A study on a multi-sided gaming platform. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 1-16. doi:10.1080/09537325.2022.2065977
Rong, K., Ren, Q., & Shi, X. (2018). The determinants of network effects: Evidence from online games business ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 134, 45-60. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.05.007
Srinivasan, A., & Venkatraman, N. (2010). Indirect Network Effects and Platform Dominance in the Video Game Industry: A Network Perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 57(4), 661-673. doi:10.1109/TEM.2009.2037738
 Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, doi: https://utpjournals.press/doi/10.3138/cjpe.30.1.108