Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : BubbaGump (18)  

Feedback:   All (62)  |   Reviews (11)  |   Comments (4)  |   Replies (47)

Other:   Replies Received (61)  |   Trust Ratings (30)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 51-62 of 62 Page :    < Previous Page

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Reply
51
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)
Reply of messmer's Reply

hmm..Interesting. I read the reply from the Customer Service rep in that thread.

Not sure what to make of that. Piracy certainly would be a top concern on my mind if I owned a site. However, the 7 week cutoff seems rather arbitrary. Why 7 and not 12, for instance?

My hunch on this is that the explanation is partially true--my opinion only and not to be taken as fact. There are concerns about piracy, but I also suspect this might just be a good business move in terms of bandwidth. I say this as they do not employ this date restriction with photo gallery downloads. I downloaded galleries from stuff dated way back to 2005. There are no restrictions. I assume pirates will go after the photos as well.

So, my guess is that this limit also serves as a practical bandwidth decision that keeps the server from slowing down with folks downloading older videos.


01-16-12  01:23pm

Reply
52
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)
Reply of messmer's Reply

Hello.

I don't see anything at Scoreland indicating a limit on downloads. There is no info in the signup screen indicating a limit but it doesn't say 'Unlimited Downloads' either. I do not download much in the way of videos so I didn't even think about this when signing up. If there is a lmit, it's probably snuck in on the fine-print on those user aggreements we always click yes to.

On this subject, something wierd I discovered at XL girls was that some videos did not have a download option at all, while others did. It makes no sense as to why certain videos could not be downloaded. It doesn't appear to be based on when the video was added or any specific content. For instance, a recent XXX action video can be downloaded, whereas a solo video one-month old cannot and vice-versa at places.


01-16-12  12:36pm

Reply
53
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)
Reply of otoh's Reply

Hi. Thanks, guys.

I try to offer the kind of info I like to see. I try not to overdo a review, but considering we spend money on this stuff, it is certainly worth it to give the straight poop.

I always thought of porn review sites as simply fronts for studios, as a lot do seem to be heavily biased. This site seems pretty objective and fair so far and the members giving reviews are not just someone from the company in disguise.


01-16-12  09:12am

Reply
54
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)
Reply of Monahan's Reply

They do that at scoreland, too. I was offered XLGirls for $19.99 and the Scoreland sub was $39.99.

As I mentioned in my other review, the price is on the high side.

IMO, XL girls should be a subsite to Scoreland. The sites that are offered at Scoreland as subsites are really not that great--basically just older content of some of the classic scoreland models.


01-15-12  05:00pm

Reply
55
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(5)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi.

I am not really sure how each site manages their sales. I assume they have hired consultants that analyzed the bandwidth requirements and how this effects the profits.

You are what is termed a power-user. This is neither good nor bad. But I assume that sites prefer not to retain such customers, even though they wouldn't ever publically say so. More DL traffic means you have to purchase more servers or people will complain about slow connectivity etc..

I don't really think anyone would offer this upgrade stratification as the extra charge probably wouldn't justify any possible increase in revenue for offering this.

To me, a site that has DL limits is basically saying they do no want power users who are going to be downloading a lot of content in a short amount of time. Very few sites do this but I think more would like to. They probably don't want to drive away people who think they might be limited, even though they may never really reach daily limits. For sites with DL limits, power-users are certainly welcome to apply, but your requirements are not going to not be met.

Again, everything i offered could be complete BS. That's just my take.


01-15-12  04:57pm

Review
56
Visit XL Girls

XL Girls
(0)

80.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -- Large number of models.
-- Easier to naviagte and find content than Scoreland master site.
-- Photography and xxx videos are not over-the-top and the style is classic (think Playboy or Penthouse.) This is either a pro or con, depending on perspective. Will appeal to more classic consumers of erotica.
-- Galleries and vidoes do not jump right into the action. Plenty of tease photos and slow undressing.
-- Images are of high-quality, although sometimes can apper a bit plastic.
Cons: -- Photoshoots sometimes seem to be heavily air-brushed. Can sometimes appear 'plastic'.
-- Might not be as explicit in terms of xxx content as some would prefer. Either a pro or con, see above.
-- For some reason, the DL speed and streaming was slower than at Scoreland.
-- Probably not enough updates to keep long-term subscribers used to large volume. Best for one-month subscriptions.
-- Should be part of Scoreland main subscription.
Bottom Line: Background:

My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.

I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- The photography and video presentations are sexy and alluring without being too in-your-face. If you are into things like ass-to-mouth, pile drivers, and things like that, you are not going to find it here. This is either good or bad, depending on your own preferences. About 80% of the photo and video content is softcore posing, either solo or girl-girl. hardcore content is typical fare-classic oral, missionary, doggy, etc., although the scenes usually end with popshots on the breasts rather than face--it's a breast site.

--Navigatiuon and menus are a bit simplified from the information-overload present at Scoreland.

-- Photography could use a little diversification in poses and sets. The photosets often to seem to follow the same script. The photographers could also tone down the airbrushing a bit. Sometimes this pervades the images.

-- Streaming and DL speeds are not as quick as at the master site Scoreland.
-- The site will likely not keep long-term interest. Site should probably be included with a Scoreland subscription and not exist as a seperate pay-site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Summary:
I added this site when signing up for a one-month subscription to Scoreland. The cost was $19.99 for one month, non-recurring.

BBW stands for Big Beautful Women.

The first two two terms here are relative. I have had an erotic interest in this genre over the years.. I have discovered that 'Big' can mean anything from slightly plump to to morbidly obese. The women shown at XL girls generally falls somewhere in the middle. One characteristic all the models have is that that they all sport large, natural-looking breasts. Most appear to be young, twenty-somethings, althought there are a few MILF models. Pretty faces are the norm.

Beauty is also in the eye of the beholder and this genre won't be for everyone. It is refreshing, however, to see more natural-looking women in this industry--the kind you are likely to encounter on the street. Also, in the photosets, the models will actually smile and don't look irritated or annoyed.

The photos at the site are much more profresinal-looking than most BBW images I have come accross in the past, The photographers could tone down the airburhsing a bit, however.

I guess this genre is defined by anything that does not fit the cookie cutter mold of what the average man would find appealing in terms of physcique. The women at XLGirls look like natural women on the plump side, all with motherly figures.Silicone appears to be used sparingly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conclusion:

This is definately a niche site that will appeal to fans of plump, rubenesque women one would find in classic paintings, albeit with large chests.

The site is a mix of photos and videos. There is not a large amount of XX action here and most videos are solo or girl-girl.

IMO, who would like this site:

Photo lovers and those with a fetish for plump, rubenesque, motherly women or those who have a breast fetish. Also, this site will appeal to those who enjoy a more classic, conservative style in their photos and explicit videos.

IMO, who won't like this site:

Those who are looking for the cookie-cutter, well-toned models who spend most of their days in the gym and count their calories. Also, those who rarely view photosets or solo video action or those who enjoy more extreme hardcore action.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grades(obviously subjective):

Site Navgigation: B
Video Presentation Style: A
Video Quality: A
Photo Presentations: B
Photo Content and Quality: A
The Models Themselves: A
Streaming and DL Speeds: C
Quantity: B
XXX Action: D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suggestions for improvement:

Addf this site to the standard Scoreland subscription.

More creativity in photos. Diversify the photosets to include more angles and perspectives. Photosets tend to stick to a classic script.

01-15-12  03:12pm

Replies (11)
Review
57
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)

80.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -- Huge amount of content.
-- Large variety of model types within the 'big-boob' genre.
-- Fairly decent DL speeds.
-- Photography and xxx videos are not over-the-top and the style is classic (think Playboy or Penthouse.) This is either a pro or con, depending on perspective. Will appeal to more classic consumers of erotica.
-- Galleries and vidoes do not jump right into the action. Plenty of tease photos and slow undressing.
-- Images are of high-quality, although sometimes can apper a bit plastic.
Cons: -- Not the most user-friendly site when it comes to navigation or finding content.
-- Photoshoots sometimes seem to be heavily air-brushed. Can sometimes appear 'plastic'.
-- A little pricey compared to competition.
--- Although the content amount is huge, it is easy to become a bit overwhelmed by it when trying to decide on selections.
-- Might not be as explicit in terms of xxx content as some would prefer. Either a pro or con, see above.
-- No HD Video Download Option--Only Streaming.
Bottom Line: Background:

My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.

I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pros and Cons:

-- The amount of content here is huge. I used to subscribe to Voluptuous and Score back in the 90's. The models represent the type of women I find attractive. You can find content dating back to the 90's on the site.

-- Streaming and DL speeds seem to be up to par and there are no problems to report here, so far.

-- The photography and video presentations are sexy and alluring without being too in-your-face. If you are into things like ass-to-mouth, pile drivers, and things like that, you are not going to find it here. This is either good or bad, depending on your own preferences. About 80% of the photo and video content is softcore posing, either solo or girl-girl. hardcore content is typical fare-classic oral, missionary, doggy, etc., although the scenes usually end with popshots on the breasts rather than face--it's a breast site.

-- It can be a bit difficult at first to navigate around the huge of amount of content in the archives. More user-friendly options would be nice.

-- Photography could use a little diversification in poses and sets. The photosets often to seem to follow the same script. The photographers could also tone down the airbrushing a bit. Sometimes this pervades the images.

-- Subscription rates also seem to be a little bit higher in cost than the typical site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Conclusion:

This is definately a niche site that will appeal to fans of large-breasted women, especially of the voluptuous and/or curvy variety. Models can range from thin-and-stacked to soft and voluptuous.

The site is a mix of photos and videos. If viewing softcore images of chesty, well-endowed women is your thing, you won't be dissapointed. There is a fair amount of xxx video action to be found, but the majority of presentations, both photo and video, are softcore solo or girl-girl.

Update 1/24/12-- HD Video Downloading is NOT an option. One can only stream HD videos. I discovered this recently. One must subscribe to Score HD to download HD.

IMO, who would like this site:

Photo lovers and those with a breast fetish who enjoy a variety of body types and those who enjoy a more classic conservative style in their photos and explicit videos.

Who won't like this site:

Those who rarely view photosets or solo video action or those who enjoy more extreme hardcore action.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Grades(obviously subjective):

Site Navgigation: C-
Video Presentation Style: A
Video Quality: A
Photo Presentations: B+
Photo Content and Quality: A
The Models Themselves: A
Streaming and DL Speeds: A
Quantity: A+
XXX Action: C

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suggestions for improvement:

Improve the site navigation utility and add options to make the user experience a bit easier.

01-15-12  12:04pm

Replies (9)
Reply
58
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(5)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi.

If you are a high-volume user then download limits are certainly something negative.

As far as streaming and downloads, they are two different animals. Both, done in high volumes, can slow down connectivity and they both take the same bandwidth in most cases. However, one takes an active time commitment, the other does not.

I suspect you would be hard-pressed to find users who stream entire videos from start to finish in front of their computer, and do so 3-4 times a day. Most people probably only stream certain sections they find interesting and the bandwidth used is probably quite small. Streaming videos real-time requires a large time commitment.

With downloads, you can simply set a number of them going and move on and retrieve them later. No time commitment is involved and you don't sit there watching the download. Most people are probably going to download and watch later. The sites all have to know this and understand it is downloads that consume most of the bandwidth. Streaming probably accounts for a small fraction of useage.

Unlimited downloads are kind of like an all-you-can-eat buffet. Most people probably won't make more than 1-2 passes to the buffet table in a single sitting before they have had their fill. There will always be people who keep going back, however, and I suspect that most site owners don't really care if such consumers move on to other pastures. It is profitable to retain the ones who only make 2 passes.


01-12-12  03:57pm

Reply
59
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(5)
Reply of Cybertoad's Reply

Hello. Thanks. I tried to be fair and objective about it. never reviewed a porn site before.

01-12-12  03:43pm

Reply
60
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(5)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Another possibility is connectivity. Users downloading hd content all day can slow down the server for other members.

This is a business that I assume caters to the avg user. Volume is key to profits. I am sure such a business does research using industry data and historical data gleaned from past user behavior when it comes to download figures. The number is likely set based on the needs and behavior of the avg subscriber to such a site. You don't want power users because they are a drain. You want the power users to leave so setting a cap serves a purpose in this regards as well. You make your profits off the avg consumer. Limits likely are set accordingly.

I am not minimizing your frustration but this is probably just what a consultant felt represented the most prudent decision based on profit margins vs retention.

Then again, everything I just offered could be complete bs.


01-12-12  07:39am

Reply
61
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(5)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi. Thanks.

I like to know contexts when I read reviews, whether for cars or movies. It's often hard to tell where people are coming from. Everyone has preferences and varied experiences and this can slew opinions.

As far as the reason for having a limit on dl but not streams, I can only surmise that perhaps this is a means of preventing individuals or networks from easily pirating content? Since bandwidth charges are the same for both methods, this might be the case.

Then again, it could be a way to keep subscribers from bailing after a month-long frenzy of downloading all videos for future use. This would also be a valid explanation.

The last possibility would be related to technical specs. Perhaps there is some odd technical reason. I would not be inclined to think this is the case.

My guess is its a combination of the first 2 above. This would be something I couldn't fault a business for implementing. You want to keep a customer base around and piracy is a big issue for any online media outlet. However, you also have to take into account the competition. Apparently, the owners do not see such a limit as stifling sales or they wouldn't make such a move.


01-12-12  06:11am

Review
62
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(5)

80.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: -- Large Amount Of Content, both in quantity and variety. Enough to satisfy many interests.
-- High Quality Videos.
-- Sexy models. Model-types range from bra busters to thin and petite.
-- Good number of sub-sites with decent content(mostly)
Cons: -- Streaming and Downloading can be hit or miss.
-- No High-Resolution Photos.
-- Repetitive photos in sequences.
-- Downloading Limit of 10 G daily.
Bottom Line: A little background to put things in perspective:

My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.

I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.

With that being said, I have found the site to be somewhat lacking for my preferences, not in content or quality of the presentations, but in the medium available.

If you are looking for sexy models and high quality videos you will not be dissapointed. If you have a bias for high-resolution photography, you are likely to find the site lacking a bit in terms of photographic standards. However, given that I do view many of the images on an Ipad at times, this hasn't been a show-stopper. When viewed on a high-resolution flatpanel monitor, the images are lacking, simply due to the smaller formats and low pixel counts.

The videos themselves are of high-quality and the camera work is fairly decent. Many of the scenes start with the model fully clothed and do not jump right into the action.

Navigating the site is very simple and straightforward. It is designed quite well and is not lacking here, IMO. Jumping from one site to the other is seamless. Getting to the downloads is also seamless and straightforward. Everything is a click away.

As far as DL and Streaming speeds, this is where I give the lowest marks. At times, it was difficult to even stream videos at standard quanity. Most of the time, I was getting nowhere near the claimed DL speed and bit-ratre transfer when I did attempt to download videos at standard resolutions. The times I did try a HD download, I would often timeout and have to restart. On weekends, the problem was particularly noticeable. Slow connections are quite understandable at this time of the week. However, the server seemed to slow to a crawl and would often become asburdly slow.

To sum up, if variety, quality content, and video presentations are your primary interests, it's a safe bet that you probably will not be dissapointed. If transfer rates and streaming connectivity are of paramount importance, I would take this into consideration.

Cancelation: Just a note on this as I know this is one of my concerns when I sign up over the net. When I read reviews, I sometimes hear of extra charges taking place after an order has been canceled. I experienced no issues and giving notice of intent to cancel was no issue and took place as requested.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Grades: (obviously subjective calls, so take that into consideration as well.)

Presentation and Site Navigation: A
Overall Quality of Content: B+
Subject Matter Variety: A +
Content Variety for Varied Interests: A
Standard Video Quality: B
HD Video Quality: A
Scene Content and Videography: B+
Photo Gallery Compositions and Content: C+
Photo Resolution and Image Quality: C-
The Models Themselves: A
The Action: B
DL Speed and Streaming: D-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My favorite sub-sites within the URL--relative to my interests and not quality:

Dangerous Cuvres, Big Naturals.

Least Favorite: Pure 18 and Cum Fiesta. (Models too thin and young-looking for my tastes)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other things to note: There is a download limit of 10 GIG daily. This was of no concern to me as I stream videos mostly and did not download much in the way of videos. If you are a massive user of downloadable HD video content, this very well might be soemething to consider. If you aren't downloading HD more than twice a day, it shouldn't be a problem. In fairness to these guys, you would have to be downloading a lot of content every day to hit the max.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suggestions for improvement:

-- Address concerns with streaming connectvity and download speeds. Slower speeds are to be expected on weekends but not weekdays.

-- Add high-resolution image galleries. The days of CRT monitors have long since passed. 800 pixel-width images images no longer cut it in the day of 2800x1900 high-resolution monitors.

01-11-12  06:08pm

Replies (15)

Shown : 51-62 of 62 Page :    < Previous Page

Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.59 seconds.