What we experience is clearly real.
Basically it comes down to: that which exists which is known vs. that which exists which is unknown.
There there are different levels of this.
The idea behind the Nihilist focus on "nothing", is that negation of anything always gives you the same thing - absence of anything. If you therefore master the notion of negation, you have a tool for understanding anything that exists.
The problem is that if negation points to nothing, and there is no nothing, knowing about nothing gets us no where. However, the optimal trade off will always exist somewhere between absolute intensity and absolute nothingness. This is the gold mean notion of ethics - that goodness is found either by complete elimination, or by allowance up to a certain value, depending on other conditions.
The relevant optimisation to be performed here is that between focus on what is known to exist, and focus on what is not known to exist. If you imagine the greatest thing you can, which is not everything, and then randomly deviate from this structure, you will -eventually- (given increasing jumps over time) reach something even greater.