My expectations are set by the gaming landscape as a whole. For example, virtually all games releasing nowadays have a manual save feature. I expect that. A dev coming out during development to say their game doesn’t have manual saving doesn’t suddenly make that okay.

It’s an extreme example, but my point is that a dev disclosing something before release shouldn’t magically negate all criticism of it. People are allowed to be frustrated by things this game does poorly that other games excel at, even if the devs were transparent about those shortcomings.

Good strawman, notice how I never specified planetary landings? Cause I already knew that it was going to be a loading screen.

I'm talking about the fractured nature of the surface and the inability to fly from place to place in space. Or transition from locations in atmosphere. Everything is its own tiny location and fast traveling the rule of thumb. It seems like they kept as little information on this specific aspect as possible until the preorders were in. Probably so that the nature of the game wouldn't drive away people looking for something with more of an interconnected holistic model of travel. They knew the truth would severely reduce their consumer base so they pretended it was "Star Citizen (with severe limitations)" instead of "Mass Effect: Andromeda (but you can customize and fly the tempest yourself)"

Someone in here said it best, "I have no idea what the purpose of including space ships and space travel even was." If that's a legitimate question in your space game, you failed.