Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Comment A note about the site and any replies from other users.

Visit MC Nudes

MC Nudes (0)

Denner (235) 08-29-09  09:17am
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (77), NO (0)

a 91 - ?????

Maggie, Maggie...my old favorite at TBP.
Please reconsider - 91 for MC Nudes - how can that be?
Oh, I love/dig those new fine "smileys' - happy and not so happy. And those well founded words..
But MC Nudes does NOT deserve a 91 - and the reasons are obvious:
The videos are all just simply boring or very close to.
The photosets are - like the videos - all in fine tech-quality - but still no where near (for instance) Met Art or 1ByDay - when it comes down to fine softcore porn.
I tend to the average of our PUs at about 80 (still a BIT high) - and please see both Droolers (a bit old) and jd1961's newer reviews...

Reply To Comment

Comment Replies (8)

Replies to the user comment above.

Msg # User Message Date


Drooler (220) Actually, I'll have to say that the last time I was at the site (a few months ago), they'd at least solved their sluggish server problem.

As for the vids, I tried one or two and they were a bore to me, as usual.

The photos were a mixed bag. Some I found exciting of girls like Gwen and Thalia and Judith Fox and Lorena.

But the site does have an annoying tendency to present the girls in a "distant" way that I don't like.

I join every now and then after several months hoping to pick up some sweetness amidst all of the ho-hum, "so what" posing. And I agree that in spite of its strengths (volume, navigation, and speed), the site doesn't make it into the '90's.

If the models don't seem to give a shit, why should the user?

08-29-09  12:08pm

Reply To Message


Denner (235) REPLY TO #1 - Drooler :

Oh, yes....PUs and webmasters/owners of MC Nudes.
Read Droolers reply and then think about the last line:

'If the models don't seem to give a shit, why should the user?'

08-29-09  02:42pm

Reply To Message


Andreas (5)
REPLY TO #1 - Drooler :

Hello Drooler,
thank you for you comment but to give us the opportunity for improvement we need your critics at a constructive level.

1. Connectivity issuees
MC-Nudes have a support team ready for service. In case of trouble you should contact them first, before spreading rumors that aren't proofed.

We have to check several details like your browser, connectivity, location and so on, to see wher the problem truly occurs.

It's pretty hard to solve something we don't know about and our support team never got any mails or informations about it yet.

2. Can you send a mail to gridcom@mc-nudes.com too explain the "distance" you see on different sets. Please provide examples to get an idea of what exactly distracts you.

3. How about forwarding additional ideas for improvement, we can't handle your critics about, navigation, speed and so on without any further details.

Thanks in advance

08-30-09  01:06pm

Reply To Message


Andreas (5)
REPLY TO #2 - Denner :

Pretty lame and unrespectful towards the girls to suppose them to give a shit about ... not much to say about something connected with personal taste and impression.
08-30-09  01:09pm

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #3 - Andreas :

I'll be happy to give my constructive criticism right here.

First, regarding connectivity to the site, as I noted in my reply to Denner, that pretty much ceased to be problem. It had been a problem at the time I wrote my review, which is now pretty old, but the last time I was a member, speed in navigating and downloading was satisfactory.

Things about the site that I don't like sometimes are:
1. photos that are too dark (lack of light). An example of a set that does NOT have that problem is Lorena "Day in Bed."
2. blurriness in photos that are at their largest size. It's pretty hard to see something clearly when it's out of focus.
3. galleries in which the model is not looking into the camera in most of the photos. It's nice to sense some connectedness with the subject. When they're constantly, or almost constantly, looking away, it's boring.

Thanks for asking!

08-30-09  02:51pm

Reply To Message


Andreas (5)
REPLY TO #5 - Drooler :

Hello Drooler,
thank you for your statement.

First let me the point that it's nearly impossible to hit anybodies taste with every release.

1. We have a lot of visitors, who exactly welcome this absence of ligtht. They say it has more imaginative power compared to a fully exposed girl. Unless these proponents we keep the level for this kind of sets to a minimum. The rare amount of sets like that shouldn't be a problem at all?

2. Is this something you only realised on MCN or is this a general problem. I have already passed this to our QA. We will discuss this for future prevention.

3. We have to check ourselves if the accumulation of "distanced" sets has been accumulated over the last periods. I personally agree with you, that distanced girls have a another kind of attraction that does not appeal to anybody.

Just to clear it out, in case of approval we will definetly change it real soon again.

Anybody is free to contact me in case of additional suggestions, questions, critics or praise. ;)

Have a nice day

08-30-09  11:39pm

Reply To Message


Denner (235) REPLY TO #4 - Andreas :

I'll try to answer this in my best english-language (but, ok - that's the deal here):

This is not a matter of respect/disrespect towards the girls/models. Neither Drooler or this user say anything about the girls "giving a shit".
If a model - (and in this case - quite a few) shows little or no interest during a video, it's probably NOT the model/girl - but more likely the photografer/director/producer ect. Some of the girls at MCN are at other sites too. And some doing a much better "acting" for the viewer.
But then again: Ok, we all got different taste - and other viewers find the style at MCN good....been a member 3-4 times - and I just find the videos more and more tame or "lame" - to use your own expression...

08-31-09  05:36am

Reply To Message


Andreas (5)
REPLY TO #7 - Denner :

Hi Denner,
thank you for the explanation. We will keep that in mind for the future to warrant more disversification on this.

Kind regards

08-31-09  07:43am

Reply To Message

*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

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.


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 0.02 seconds.