I've seen many videos of NMS and after the first few seconds it always gives the same inpression to me:
* graphic-design
- aimed at 6 year olds: happy colours, chubby ships
- very low fi
- I don't know if the above correlation to
uncovering static is valid, US uses top-notch raymarching, some of the best you can get - what does NMS use? from the geo-popup which can be seen everywhere it's not raymarching at all and so the association is not very flattering to US
* asset design
- everything feels small
- the landing pads expand like jack in the box and fold up like a origami which both is neither practical not necessary but "cute"
* gameplay design
- transportation feels superfast
- launching in orbit to touching down on the surface like 30 seconds... oh god why...
- what's the aim of this thing?
- currently no player skill involved at all it seems, more like a 3d fly by demo
- this planet has been found by player "OLOLOL IM THE GR34T35T"... player induced assets will break every game's atmospheric neck on the long run
I accept everyone has a different taste and different claims to be fulfiled - but NMS can't please me on ANY level. I really try to understand what people like about it as I can't understand....
For me NMS falls into the category of "mobile games". And I honestly haven't seen anything why it should not work on mobile hardware. Proc gen is quick enough to generate landscape and asset chunks on the fly on a two core mobile CPU and the graphics pop up so badly they are either badly programmed or already have low end hardware as focus.
Edit: here's a
4 KiB demo "elevated" from rgba/tbc (
youtube) showing some proc gen landscapes, with music and effects. It's using
raymarching (link to page of creator of evelated) however, too, so it's probalby probably looking better than NMS (and Elite, too)

[video=youtube;rCHX8QU3cLI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCHX8QU3cLI[/video]