It's the design that really makes the difference

[Silverwolf]

The thing about ED is it has the best thought out design and gameplay.

And there are several examples where others are going off the mark and one quote on the official forums struck me in particular about a flaw in SC design :

"The hangar module is a cool idea but if you are 50 star systems away it may be real inconvenient to get to your hangar or a total immersion breaker that your hangar follows you wherever you go in the galaxy. Or is the intent to always start the game from that location and have the jump gates have unlimited range? None of those sounds immersive to me. "

Now I am feeling DB is anchoring ED with a clever enough brain and design making prowess not to make design pitfalls like that.

[GlobusDiablo]

.......Now I am feeling DB is anchoring ED with a clever enough brain and design making prowess not to make design pitfalls like that.

I felt it in Frontier: Elite 2, and I'm feeling it in Elite: Dangerous. David Brabens drive for perfection, detail, accuracy, and general love of space, can only lead to another ground breaking game.

This coupled with his truly british sense of doing it right the first time, or not doing it at all, and you have the makings of something potentially eminent.

I still feel that Frontier: Elite 2 is one of the best games ever made. And I think that Elite: Dangerous has the potential to honour it's ancestor.

[DeckardRunner]

.... I think that Elite: Dangerous has the potential to honour it's ancestor.

Hear Hear.
Elite Dangerous I have no doubt will be held as a benchmark by which subsequent games of the ilk are judged. Just like many games post 1984 where judged. You would often read in the magazines of the time, "it's a good game, but it's not Elite"