Well, an interesting comparison on this issue, but I'll express my opinion like this
- The nature of NFT is more about hype than the ability to apply it in practical activities, not only on Reddit but in the period when the crypto market was doing well before that NFT appeared in all different forms but I'm really stupid because The real meaning of whether it exists or not, the use of everything is still the same, people's FOMO following that hype trend is only short-term.
- And why at this point am I speculating about L2 being a necessity for the market, to me it's part of the infrastructure to solve the problems I mentioned, and Matic has been doing well with the position they have as well as the potential, it will also be part of the trending. But of course the story of speculation is not too reliable, right now many big names are talking about implementing this and there is absolutely a basis for speculation.
Well we shall se who wins.
But like woul said, hype is only for the token, not the usecase. And hype for token doesn't bring adoption, in fact it could hurt adoption when fees are complex and price of matic so fluctuating.
If i recall correctly you need both matic and eth to use polygon, while you need only small amount of eth to use arbitrum. So in my eyes, simplicity wins the race if we want to lure in normies who struggle with metamask already. This is why i would like to see Arbitrum to win the adoption.
And while i don't see this as simple enough either, we have come a long way from ages before metamask and eth probably gets even more easier to use.