- 100% Independent Sim Racing News

Project CARS 2 – From Sim To Pro With Tommy Milner

Slightly Mad Studios have released the next part of their Built By Drivers documentary films, telling the story of 2-time Le Mans Champion Tommy Milner.

Slightly Mad Studios have released the next part of their Built By Drivers documentary films, telling the story of 2-time Le Mans Champion Tommy Milner.

Today, Milner is a highly-decorated Corvette Racing works driver, but it all started out in the sim racing community when young Tommy was looking to help out a group of aspiring young mod developers.

Discover the full story by watching the film below.

Project CARS 2 is now available for pre-order.

The title will bring 180+ cars and 60 tracks to the PC, Playstation 4 & Xbox One, starting September 22.

Powered by the studios’ Live Track 3.0 technology that allows dynamic surface conditions and the title’s comprehensive dynamic weather engine, Project CARS 2 is able to simulate racing in any weather & season, including heavy winter weather & snow.

Aside from graphics & sound improvements, Project CARS 2 comes with refined physics featuring the title’s cutting-edge tire model and improved AI as well as brand-new gamepad controls & FFB improvements. The new version comes with robust eSports & online capabilities including Online Championship mode, driver rating as well as race directing & broadcast controls.

The full list of all cars included in Project CARS 2 can be found here.

  • Bakkster

    Milner tends to be more under the radar with his sim racing than some other pros, like SVG or Nicki Thiim, but he’s definitely legit.

    • Bakkster
    • Manuel Riger

      the diffrent is milner gets paid and nicki thiim is a iracing fan. Now there lot of pro drivers on pc1 who worked with them and said game is n1

      • Race Nut

        Okay but, BC is not a hardcore Sim-racer so it’s good to have input with both disciplines – RL and virtual. Pat Long also has more useful input from a Sim-perspective. I’d pay less attention to the marketing speak and more to what they might bring to PC2 Sim-handling.

      • Manuel Riger

        when i think about physics its for me that u can not change it like a slider. If u have the right physics and put in the correct data(tire model ) the outcome should be the best possible. For me it sounds like they have to adjust a lot in pc2 what there main physic doesn t do correct. And a other vid. with the mclaren 720 said the same. The test driver said first it felt not right after 1 month it does feel great. Sounds a bit strange to me

      • RIMT

        It isn’t like rfactor where they can drag and drop their tire model and other physical data. Different methods. But that’s why rfactor is so CPU demanding.

      • Richard Hessels

        Any modern CPU can handle rF1 with ease.
        It does proper multicore support.
        I only get 100% cpu around 300fps on my old overclocked i7.

      • RIMT

        I meant to say rfactor 2. But it looks like I didn’t even reply to the right person so my comment is irrelevant.

      • HardRock

        There are at least two problems with your thinking:

        1) No hardware today can simulate real world physics at acceptable frame rates and at a granularity needed for simracing. For this reason all physics models today are simplified one way or another, whether they produce realistic results using real world data or not. If they do, great, but that certainly doesn’t mean that the physics behind the scene are any more “right”. You can produce realistic results with unrealistic data and unrealistic results with real data.

        2) As a developer you don’t always have the data needed to reproduce the real thing anyway. In the case of classic cars and tires, the data can be lost in the worst case or more often not as detailed as it would be needed for an accurate simulation, meaning that some amount guesswork is always involved. On the other hand, with newer hardware the values you are looking for are often closely guarded trade secrets.

      • Manuel Riger

        I don t say its simple but if u want a realistic sim i think the physics base engine should be like this. Thats why unreal 4 engine is the future of simracing if u can t do it by ur self. I did not say its easy that not the topic the question is will pc2 get to this level of a ac or better with this way

      • HardRock

        The Unreal engine isn’t any different in regards to what I was saying. There is no “right” or “correct” physics engine, each has it’s own downsides, corners cut in order to reach acceptable performance. As a result, during game development each has to be modified to fit the parameters of the game. For sims, the Unreal engine may be more than others, since nowadays it is developed as an all-purpose engine, not specific to racing sims.

      • Manuel Riger

        The unreal engine 4 is based on real time physics calculation which make it a good base engine for simracing.

      • hotak

        lol every single sim out there has real-time physics, it doesn’t mean anything, simulating gravity, inertia, mass-spring-damper is one thing, and is
        -given by known and easy-to-solve equations
        -not really computationally heavy as long as they stay independent, you can increase accuracy only by calculating them more frequently (you have to calculate them, ideally, at 2 times the max frequency of movemente they’ll reach)

        Then, even calculating suspensions means lots of spring-damper interactions, lots of non-idealities (every single piece will somehow flex in every single direction). You won’t be able to compute everything correctly, so you have to make some assumption and simplification to get a reasonably accurate model that’s not so heavy to compute many times per second.

        Then there’s aero, you can do it in a very simple way by 3 values, cx, cz, cz distribution giving downforce when going straight, but when you have a car in front or when your car is leaning on suspension in any direction or is slipping, the aero force varies, doing it in realistic calculation is VERY slow, so, again, you have to aproximate.

        Then we get to tire model, there’s materials science involved, lots of parameters to consider, no real data avaible on most of them, and even when it’s there most menifacturers won’t give it away. And – guess it – no way you can calculate it real-time and most sims don’t even calculate its approximation in realtime, just use lookup n-dimensions (with n the number of parameters taken into consideration) tables to decide how much grip should the tire have at each physics “tick”.
        pCars does it real-time for many segments of every tyre, also obviously having near segments influencing each other and also simulating how the carcass moves and flex under both vertical and rotational forces.

        If it was as simple as you seem to think, why no sim is life-like and why no developer is making sims with UE4 using its “real time™” physics engine?

      • Richard Hessels

        Actually we can come very close to a good simulation in the it’s around 98% range. Judging the laptimes and data.
        But there is another thing that makes the difference.
        The Realworld.
        Sitting in a car that’s 50 degrees while going in to turns with 2 or 3 G for hour in a row. Knowing that if you make a mistake it could be over.

      • HardRock

        I’m not disagreeing with laptimes and data, but the physics calculations that are used to reach them are still nowhere near complete. Realistic results with unrealistic data, as I mentioned.

        Damage is still extremely simplified in most cases, there are only a few major components being simulated. Body damage also doesn’t affect aero as much as it should, except for the wings. Tire simulation is getting really complex, but for example in Project CARS “only” 32 points are measured on each tire for many of the calculations, which is not exactly the whole body. Collision meshes are also greatly simplified, having nowhere near the detail of the car you actually see. These are just a few things that come to mind.

        Let me be clear though, each sim today is extremely advanced compared to what we had before, but they still have a long way to go in terms of accuracy. I would say that a pristine car’s behavior is pretty damn accurate in most circumstances, but even then, the calculations used to achieve this are not exactly what would pass in scientific simulation. It’s kinda what we have with graphics. Games look beautiful nowadays, but for performance reasons we are still using polygons to build meshes, baked in shadows, overly aggressive occlusion culling that can bug out, LOD levels that make objects pop, etc. At a glance, we have photorealistic graphics, but take away the smoke and mirrors and the experience will fall apart, since we are very far from simulating the real world with our home computers at 60 FPS, both in graphics and physics.

      • Bakkster

        Well, I’m guessing a lot of pros have gotten paid at one point or another by one developer or another.

        I think it’s important that when a pro talks about a sim’s quality that they’re at least a sim fan to begin with, otherwise they’re just a paid talking head. Milner’s in the sim fan category, going back to 2011 when he was using iRacing to help prep for racing for the factory team. At that point, then you can filter whether the feedback/view is high quality or not.

    • MC

      I’m honestly not sure. If a dev’ wants real world driver feedback surely that’s what they’re interested in, not the promotion aspect. I suspect it’s more they know when people (even in this community) see Max Verstappen or any real world driver driving a sim’, they think it’s an endorsement of that particular product.

      • Bakkster

        Well, I’m not so cynical as to think that a developer can’t want both valuable feedback and promotion from a partnership with a professional driver. I agree that it still needs to be taken with a grain of salt, but Tommy sim races in his spare time and that should be taken into account compared to professional driver promotion from someone who thinks they’re pointless.

      • MC

        So with pCARS where they got Ben Collins and Nic’ Hamilton in on the first game, was Nic’s promotion more sincere?

      • Bakkster

        That would be where I’d initially start, but still taking everything with a grain of salt.

  • Paul Maguire

    I heard all the same crap for PCARS1 and look how that turned out.

    • MC

      LOL, I did think the same thing watching that, personally I’ll be ignoring the hype and deciding for myself.

      • Steven Shears

        I think for me the best endorsement so far was that John Sable ex ISR.

  • MrWonka

    “Turbo” Tom goes back to the SCGT days,frequently posted on the Speedsims forums as i recall.

  • todemanjack

    After a sim is released and some pros try it and say they think it’s pretty realistic. I take note. Giving endorsements before the item is even available? Pure marketing spiel.

    • Eric Rowland

      the whole idea is to do this Before it’s released……

Follow VirtualR: