Critics praise Andy Weir for grounding his book in realism, such as in The Martian, where the focus is on his inclusion of practical and scientifically accurate problem-solving. The detail he provides in addressing survival scenarios enhances not only the reliability of the narrative but also its authenticity, making it a standout example of “hard” science fiction. The authenticity of these problem-solving techniques brings a unique level of immersion to readers who appreciate seeing real-world physics, technology, and science at work, contributing to the appeal of the story. By focusing on these elements, Weir elevates the genre of hard science fiction, ensuring that the plot and characters remain both engaging and scientifically plausible.

Critics note that Andy Weir’s success is largely attributed to his commitment to writing what he wanted to write instead of tailoring his stories to meet what others might expect. Weir started writing The Martian as a serialized blog project aimed at a niche audience of “extremely technical, science-minded dorks” like himself. He was not pursuing fame or wealth but instead simply wanted to craft a narrative grounded in scientifically accurate storytelling. This freedom allowed him to operate outside the typical expectations of mass-market appeal, focusing instead on the craft of writing itself. By following his own vision, critics say, he was able to create a story that resonated with readers who shared his passion for science and authenticity.

The advocacy for non-traditional publishing methods is clear in Weir’s unconventional path to success, critics observe. Starting with a free blog serialization, Weir transitioned The Martian to Kindle for a small fee before its rapid ascent as a bestseller. This journey serves as a clear example of how modern platforms can be used to share stories, bypassing traditional gatekeepers and reaching wider audiences. Critics emphasize how this underscores the importance of utilizing non-traditional avenues like serialized blogs, interactive fiction, and even video game storytelling. These methods allow writers to maintain creative control and foster communities that engage with their work, providing direct feedback and establishing a loyal following.

The discussion challenges the stigma surrounding alternative publishing routes, arguing that these approaches democratize storytelling. Critics argue that they provide space for experimentation, collaboration, and audience interaction, which, as seen in Weir’s story, can contribute to a work’s success. His rise to fame illustrates how embracing innovative platforms and unconventional storytelling can redefine what it means to be a "real writer." The message is clear: critics believe writers should embrace modern tools and methods, reinforcing that the quality of the story—and the dedication to writing—are what truly matter.

On the other hand, critics have noted that Weir has been critiqued for his focus on plot-driven, problem-solving narratives, which often lack the depth of character development. While his novels are filled with scientific intrigue and engaging problem-solving, critics observe that the characters sometimes feel like “sketches” rather than fully realized individuals. Critics argue that this emphasis on technical detail and experimentation takes precedence over developing complex emotional or social dynamics. As a result, Weir’s stories are often engaging and absorbing, but may not be considered “literary” in the traditional sense due to their focus on scientific challenges over emotional depth.