Well... As a beer purist (;-P) I am not too enthusiastic. First off, hops give beer much more than just the two bitter compounds. The profile of bitter compounds and polyphenols is quite complex, and it's hard to image to put all the resposible genes into yeast. So even if you can maintain the taste, you lose some ingredients with potential effects on health.
Also, for the testing against dry hop, it would be interesting to know the amount of hops they used as a comparative control. To me, the graph where their dry hop beer does increase the hoppy taste only marginally as compared to beer without hops suggests that the may have used a very low dose of hops to drive their point home - which is particularly interesting as there may be a conflict of interest involved.
In summa, I am quite surprised that paper made it to Nature Comm... Maybe I should go for it aswell with my research soon ;-)
Thanks for reading. I definitely agree that throwing a few biosynthetic pathways into yeast won't match the complexity of hops and I have a strong feeling that they're making their results look as good as possible. Nature Comm probably chose to publish this based on the impact of the work over its scientific merit, but I'm still happy to see scientific work that appeals to the general population.
I'm hoping this becomes another tool for a brewer rather than a hop replacement. If a brewer wants to up the bitterness a bit, they can use this strain and hop like normal.
That actually sounds like a good plan ;-)