I'm looking forward to Surving Mars but I have no expectations of any kind. It looks fun and when I play it, the game will show me what it does. No disappointments, only enjoyment. 
There is a lot of interest in space as of late (see how much buzz a floating car in space generated recently) so I think there is plenty of room for a Mars Colony simulator.
Some people point at the cartoon art style as a mistake, but I think such criticism misses the mark: I think the non-realism approach of using a 1950s vision of a mars colony was a mistake.
Kerbal space program is a prime example of a cartoony game with explosive popularity. People are curious about actual science, engineering, technology made accessible through games. Surviving Mars doesn't quite have the same depth to ensure longevity in my opinion.
My honest 2 cents.
I think using 1950s art is perfectly acceptable, you want to see what your colony is doing, and need to differentiate buildings visually. I am more worried that the science all seems to be hidden away. A really cartoony game like "Oxygen not included" can get away with a lot, and "Gameplay" is a perfectly acceptable excuse for everything. From Surviving Mars I expect more scientific accuracy, it is realistic enough that inconsistencies start to irk me.