Does Ethereum really need “a killer app” to accelerate adoption?

I've seen that mentioned a lot over the years, and more recently. I didn't think it was true then and I think it isn't true now, but I'll raise the question anyway and share my thoughts.

Sure, we've seen the emergence of a lot of economy, finance, and banking related apps and services, and that is all good. The world of money was long ago cornered and became quite oppressive and exploitive, so having competition there is great. But, let's just focus on "apps" and other web services, which have matured over the years, and like the world of money, have become quite centralized in the hands of just a few, especially when it comes to the service side of apps. Also, consider that many developers of even casual and niche services have realized, sadly for consumers, but realized that if they are going to continue supporting and improving their apps, if it's going to even be worth their time at all, they often need to be subscription based. As a consumer, I hate this. As a developer, it's a function of ever rising cost of EVERYTHING, and trying to find a balance and pursue ones passion, but also keep food on the table along with all of the other responsibilities we have. And here is my point. Why does Ethereum need "a killer app". All apps, especially those who have already moved to subscription models, can build upon this platform. I've seen the emergence of just about every type of web3+ service, and the formation of decentralized organizations, automated payment systems, micro transactions (ugh), and everything else. Why does the idea that there needs to be a single "killer app" persist? I ask that genuinely, WHAT is slowing the migration to building upon this platform, to normalizing it?