That's aesthetic debt.
In Web3, where trust is visual before it's technical, sameness isn't just boring—it's expensive. It costs you recognition. It costs you differentiation. It costs you the three seconds you have to make someone care before they scroll past your gradient blob into the next identical gradient blob.
And most projects are drowning in it without realizing the water's rising.
You know this one. Purple-to-blue gradient backgrounds. Floating geometric shapes that suggest "the future" without committing to what that future actually does. Clean sans-serif headers promising decentralization while looking exactly like the centralized design system everyone else copied from Figma Community.
The aesthetic said "we're building the future of finance" but the sameness said "we couldn't be bothered to imagine what that future actually looks like."
Every protocol looked like a screensaver. Users couldn't tell products apart without reading the copy—and by then, they'd already lost interest.
Hot pink. Cyan. Squiggles everywhere. Retro-futuristic maximalism that tried to signal "fun!" and "accessible!" and "we're not your dad's blockchain!"
Except everyone did it at once, so it stopped signaling anything except "I saw what Bored Apes did and I want that energy but with less budget and more Canva templates."
The cost? You looked like a 2015 Tumblr rebrand. You looked like you'd rug. Even when you weren't going to rug, the aesthetic made people
And when the party ended, so did your credibility.
The overcorrection. Sans serif everything. Monochrome palettes. So much white space you could land a plane on it. Apple Store meets blockchain, because if we look clean enough, maybe VCs will forget we're still crypto.
The aesthetic says "we're embarrassed we're crypto."
And if you're embarrassed by what you're building, why should anyone else believe in it?
Sterile. Forgettable. The visual equivalent of a corporate apology.
This one's almost charming in its laziness. Your entire brand palette is Discord's color scheme. Sometimes with a green accent if you're feeling spicy.
You borrowed the aesthetics of community without building the actual community architecture. You look like a feature request, not a brand.
The cost? Nobody remembers you. You blend into the sidebar of every other project using the same visual shorthand for "we're community-first" while actually being "we didn't hire a designer."
Here's what aesthetic debt actually costs you:
Attention collapse. Put 10 Web3 homepages in front of someone. They can distinguish maybe 2 of them within 3 seconds. The other 8 blur together into "crypto stuff." If you can't be recognized, you can't be remembered. If you can't be remembered, you don't exist.
Trust erosion. Sameness signals "derivative product" before anyone reads a single word of your copy. Your aesthetic is the first promise you make. If it looks like everyone else's broken promise, you're starting from negative trust.
Positioning confusion. If you look like everyone in your category, your differentiation dies on scroll. Doesn't matter how novel your tech is. Doesn't matter how tight your strategy is. The visual kills the message before it lands.
And the longer you wait to fix it, the more interest compounds. Because every scroll past your sameness trains the market to ignore you.
Ask yourself three questions:
If I remove my logo, can someone identify this as mine? If the answer is no, your aesthetic is doing zero positioning work.
Does my aesthetic ladder to my positioning or just to my category? Are you making visual choices that reinforce what makes you different, or are you just checking the boxes of "what crypto looks like"?
What visual choice have I made that no competitor would make? If you can't name one, you're in debt.
Screenshot your homepage. Put it next to three competitors. Show it to five people who don't know your project.
Ask them which one is yours.
If they can't tell, you have aesthetic debt. Full stop.
List every visual element on your homepage. Color palette. Typography. Illustration style. Layout. Photography. Iconography.
Mark which ones are category defaults—the things everyone in your space does because "that's what crypto looks like."
Then replace at least 40% of them.
Not with random chaos. With choices that ladder to your positioning. With elements that reinforce the specific promise only you can make.
I'm not naming names because this isn't about dunking on specific projects. But the pattern repeats:
The project that went maximalist when everyone went minimal saw 3x recognition in user testing and measurably lower customer acquisition costs. Why? Because people could actually find them. They didn't blend into the feed.
The project that owned a "wrong" color palette—one that violated every category convention—built a cult following instead of casual scrollers. Their churn dropped. Their NPS climbed. Word-of-mouth became their primary acquisition channel because their aesthetic was repeatable as a story.
The project that stopped trying to look "professional" and embraced their actual weird saw lower churn, higher engagement, and users who showed up because of the aesthetic, not despite it.
The pattern is always the same: differentiation creates talkability. Talkability creates retention. Retention beats acquisition every time.
Monday: Run the 3-second recognition test. Be honest about the results.
Tuesday: Complete the visual positioning audit. Write down your answers. If you can't answer question 3, you know where the work is.
Wednesday: Do the differentiation gap analysis. List everything. Mark the defaults. Circle what you're going to change.
Thursday: Pick ONE element to differentiate. Not everything. Just one. Color, typography, layout, or illustration style. Make it ladder to your positioning.
Friday: Ship the change. Don't ask for permission. Don't test it to death. Ship it.
Next 30 days: Measure attention metrics. Time on site. Scroll depth. Recognition in qualitative interviews. Repeat the test.
Then do it again with a different element.
Aesthetic debt compounds. Every day you look like everyone else, you're paying interest on attention you'll never earn back.
The fix isn't "hire a designer and make it pretty." The fix is strategic visual differentiation that ladders to positioning and reinforces the promise only you can make.
Most projects won't do the work. They'll keep paying the tax because it feels safer to look like everyone else.
That's your advantage.
If your brand looks like everyone else's and you can't figure out how to break free without losing credibility, that's the work I do. Not generic "make it pretty" design—strategic visual differentiation that reinforces positioning and converts.
Work with me if you're ready to stop paying aesthetic interest: [your contact link]
Collect this post on Zora to support independent Web3 commentary.
Share Dialog
Crypto Jazz Hands
Support dialog
All comments (0)