That sure looks like a fun ride. I imagine the perspective would be similar to coming down under a parachute (it's magical). Hanging beneath a canopy at altitude, you have very little sense of motion. If you don't look up, you'd think you're flying like a bird. As you get closer to the ground, you get a real sense of motion (sometimes too much motion!). In the rocket chair, you'd probably have a similar effect.

On that particular artist's conception, the tanks appear larger than they need to be, but that depends on the propellant. There could be some serious center of gravity issues with using two tanks that are that big if you get an uneven propellant flow. It might be better to use 4 smaller tanks instead of two very large ones. Perhaps my perspective is wrong. I'm thinking of using the chair to land on the moon from orbit and to return. Maybe they're thinking of using the chair to scoot from place to place across the lunar surface. In that case, having more propellant is definitely better.

It looks like there is an engine under each tank, an arrangement that I don't like very much. Personally, if you're going to have more than one engine, I'd put them as close to the center of gravity as possible so if you had one of them fail, you'd be able to overcome the attitude change with the thrusters. You'd want each engine capable of producing substancially greater than 50% of the required thrust so that losing one engine would leave you with enough power to stay alive. Unless there were off the shelf engines that were of a suitable thrust where two of them were needed, I'd probably stick to a single engine. Sometimes, having two engines just doubles your chances of crashing.

There is no form of instrument panel shown in that artist's conception, but that may not be necessary. You could project the critical flight information inside the pilot's helment to create a heads up display. That projection system could also be useful on the surface to display all sorts of useful information.