Here’s What Really Happened With DigiDaigaku’s Controversial Super Bowl Ad
NFTs did not take over this year’s Super Bowl like they did in 2022. But perhaps this was to be expected, considering that the NFT space only recently started to emerge after a lull in the market. Despite the lack of blockchain-centric ads shown during the big game, NFTs still had a presence — and one that went far beyond Reddit’s highly successful collectible avatar collaboration with the NFL.
We talk about DigiDaigaku, of course. An NFT powered game created by Web3 startup Limit Break, DigiDaigaku made waves as one of the only Web3-leaning commercials to air during the Super Bowl. Although the project gained mass attention, it garnered a mixed bag of reactions, leaving many in the NFT space reeling and ultimately resulting in controversy.
The DigiDaigaku NFT Super Bowl commercial
According to a press release shared with nft now, the DigiDaigaku ad was meant to inspire “the biggest coin event ever.” Those who viewed the ad were asked to scan a code that would allow them to create one of 10,000 free collectibles. But that’s not exactly what happened.
In short, the commercial suffered from poor execution. While the content itself – which featured 3D animated protagonists chasing a QR code for more than 30 seconds – may have left something to be desired, the prominent asset in the ad (ie the QR code) was wrong. For many, the code didn’t direct them to create an NFT, but to the Twitter profile of Limit Break’s CEO and co-founder, Gabriel Leydon.
With a large banner reading “follow to win” set as Leydon’s Twitter header, many believed the commercial code and QR code was a form of high-level (and expensive) engagement farming. But that was clearly not the case. Instead, it was an unfortunate result of the DigiDaigaku website redirecting to Leydon’s Twitter account after the website failed to load. A significant hiccup for an ad that reportedly cost $6.5 million.
NFT Super Bowl commercial postgame
Shortly after airing, it became clear that the commercial was just part of a rapidly developing DigiDaigaku debacle. Except for Leydon tweets the ad and mint link before the ad actually aired, users noticed that the NFT claim itself was only available to those with an Ethereum wallet – meaning the majority of the millions of people watching the SuperBowl likely wouldn’t be able to to demand.
As many took to Twitter to comment lost opportunity to potentially onboard enthusiasts in the NFT space, it became clear that DigiDaigaku was not the beacon it could have been. While some collectors our able to claim the digital collectibles and walk away with a successful quick flip of 0.5 ETH ($700 at the time) or more, floor prices began to fall and currently stand at 0.288 ETH. Before the match was over, Leydon announced a second chance mint with an additional 5,000 of the free undisclosed NFT Dragon Eggs, but only time will tell what’s next for the project.
Regardless of public sentiment, Leydon sees the ad as a success. During a DigiCult Twitter space after the game, he responded to critics, saying, “I don’t know what they were expecting, but Digi did exactly what we said it was going to do.” Furthermore, regarding allegations of indentured farming, Leydon noted that he was simply doing what made economic sense. “What should I have done?” he asked. “We spent seven million dollars, and after the 4k mark, I’m going to say thank you for stopping by? No, I’m going to use that money for engagement.”
It remains to be seen how Limit Break and DigiDaigaku will move forward from the poorly received launch. But perhaps, like other hyped NFT drops of the past, they will remain a reminder of the potentially toxic effects of not living up to expectations while operating under a microscope.
