Downvote away, but Git is the ONLY real use case out there that is successful and uses something resembling a block chain.
Note I'm not trying to argue one way or another about intrinsic value or any type of moral value or any of the other unrelated tangents I often see discussions about NFTs turn into.
But objectively, as a product that exists solely on top of blockchains, NFTs are very very successful. Something that has allowed multiple individuals to auction off artworks for upwards of $60m cannot be called a failed use case.
However, I believe that the majority of people driving the popularity of NFTs fall into two overlapping camps: people who are simply trying to make money, and people who misunderstand or are otherwise oblivious to how the technology works and its limitations. To me it just seems more like a gold rush situation and does nothing to inspire confidence in the underlying technology.
Certainly there are people out there trying to leverage NFTs for more legitimate purposes - such as digital rights management and virtual items for video games - and those applications may be dubious enough by themselves. In the way they are generally being used, though, I wouldn't call NFTs a "success" any more than the South Sea Bubble was.
[0] https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2021/04/30/prices-nfts-dropping/
Is that really a success?