| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
626
|
Yummy Mama
(0)
|
Reply of
Toadsith's Review
Just wanted to say good review and glad to see you back doing reviews again; hopefully more will follow.
|
11-05-08 09:21pm
|
Reply
627
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pinkerton's Poll
Didn't we recently do a poll like this (things' you don't like in vids)? All the choices are annoying and most represent more of a "domination" theme which probably is turn off in general for most of us. I think there are definitely more annoying things than what this list contains.
|
11-05-08 05:15pm
|
Review
628
|
The Hardcore Network
(0)
74.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
+ Decent 2 day, $5 full access trial through TBP
+ Mostly exclusive material (more than 50% I'd say)
+ No DRM
+ 5 sites have HD video
+ 13 sites to choose from
+ Network wide search function for girls, acts, etc. |
| Cons: |
- Primarily a video site, although they advertise pics they generally aren't that good
- Quality varies from excellent to total crap
- Prechecked membership boxes on signup form
- Some of the usual 3rd party bonus sites but can't view the content (lure to sign you up only)
- Pics have no zips and all pics for the set appear on one page and individual pics come up in separate window
- Sporadic updates |
| Bottom Line: |
This is a network that doesn't quite know where it's going. It has some more mainstream sites but then throws in some more extreme sites. The network advertises pictures but for the most part the quality is average at best while sizes go from 1600x1200 to useless small screencaps. The vids are the most consistent in quality and quantity with the standard being 640x480 wmv with decent download speeds and some HD sites tossed in.
The following are the sites I'd score in the 70's:
Iloveyouceleste; Iloveyoumya; Iloveyoumelanie; Iloveyoumadison. All sites have about 32 vids and 22 pic sets (1000x720). The vids go HD here (up to 1440x1080). All the girls are relatively attractive and they do solo, HC, toys and lesbo. The girls often appear in each other's sites so there is a lot of overlap. Each also has a pointless and brainless diary.
Attackmyass. Has pics, 35 sets, up to 1500x1000 but most are 1000x750). Vids, about 80, are average. Mostly outside content with known pornstars.
Pleasebegentle. Younger pornstar sex with 66 vids and only a couple of photosets. Vids are average but good quality.
Chopsticksluts. Nonoriginal asian porn with average quality at best.
The following, in my opinion, fall at or below the "Mendoza Line" score of 70:
Pornstarsolos: 77 average sized vids and 60 pic sets (most 800x1200). Nothing original here and some photo sets are just partials.
Asssmoothie: This I don't quite get. You see girl, girl strips, girl fires up the blender, girl lays on floor and dumps goo in her booty, girl pushes goo out the tail pipe and then it goes down the hatch. Breakfast of champions, mmmm. This is the same setup for virtually every set; all 150 vids and 52 pic sets. They have HD vids here which is a waste because if you've seen one you've seen 'em all.
Swirliegirls: High school nerd abuse? Not really, just another site I don't get. Every scene (25 pic and 25 vid which are OK) has a girl in a toilet doing some violent bj stuff and then getting her head flushed. Tries to be brutal but most of it isn't. Again, everything is the same in every scene.
Herlastfuck: This is like a slow motion car wreck, you know it's going to hurt but you just have to peek. The vids are average at best and the pics are worthless. It's all seriously ancient eastern euro women looking for some rubles after the Soviet Union collapsed and their pensions disappeared. I couldn't bring myself to wach the 86 yr old woman give a bj. Fat and nasty is the theme here.
There are a few more sites here which, again, have varying quality and pretty standard content and rate high 60's or low 70's but they don't merit any real discussion. With such a range of quality, only OK photos, and sporadic updates I couldn't score this site in the 80's. Given that so much is average, average be the score.
I did the 2 day trial and that was more than enough to take what I wanted and get out. Don't bother with the month here |
|
11-05-08 05:00pm
Replies (3)
|
Reply
629
|
Secret Virgin
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
I was just trolling by this site, checking it out on the TBP trial offer, and just wanted to add that this site seems dead with still no updates since 2007.
For anyone else who might read this I just want to add that you can preview all of the models (you get a thumbnail look) and based upon what I saw I'd have to say that 90% or more of the hardcore sets are nonexclusive as I recognized almost all of them. So much for their exclusivity claim.
|
11-04-08 12:22pm
|
Comment
630
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
|
11-03-08 10:06pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
631
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Poll
Given the nonstop presidential news coverage I'm sure that if someone at PU administration released the poll numbers later today some news agency would pick up on it. Can't be any worse than the regular polls.
|
11-03-08 01:01pm
|
Reply
632
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
I'm somewhat with Pat362 here. I don't have a problem with someone being or having been a porn star but what little I know about the industry and models I'm guessing that eharmony is not going to match us up any time soon ;) Definitely a little discussion is on order if for no other reason than the whole std thing (HIV ain't the only problem out there).
|
11-01-08 10:30pm
|
Review
633
|
Thai Chix
(0)
74.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ 100's of vids and 100k photos
+ Many photos come in at 1500x1200 and all files have zip
+ No DRM
+ Good customer service
+ 3 day full access trial for $6 through TBP
+ Updates daily
+ No watermarks (99% of the time) |
| Cons: |
- Nonexclusive content
- Mostly American asians, no Urabon and few "asian" women
- Most vids come in clips
- Many HC photo sets are incomplete
- Quality varies
- Navigation on a site this big needs work |
| Bottom Line: |
Overall, I would have to say there is nothing special about this site. As the content is nonexclusive the quality of the photos and vids can vary. Like I noted, it's mostly American porn here although it gets more amateur and asian in the solo girl sections. Here's how it breaks down:
PHOTOS: 360 HC, 130 Lesbian and 1000 solo sets all of which have zips. About half the photos come in at 1500x1200 and most of the rest come in at full screen (1020). Some of the photos are from screen caps so they can be grainy or blurry but most are pretty good but certainly not high def. A lot of the HC sets are incomplete and out of order or feature bj's only so there wasn't a lot to pick from there. A lot of the sets seemed the same to me after a while.
VIDEOS: There are 3rd party links to full length dvd's and videos. Most of the vids are in their "in house" section. Here, the majority can only be download in clips. Most come sized in 320x240 for wmv and 640x480 for mpeg. It streamed for me at about 400 kps. The quality is mostly good but can vary. There are no screen caps.
Navigation is OK and there is some advertising on the site. They have a search function that is just OK (can't search by scene content or body type) and limited model information. Customer support is good and it bills through ccbill.
While the site updates daily most of the updates are softcore. You get one vid and one photo set a day it looks like. HC and lesbian sets/scenes update infrequently.
If you've had limited exposure to asian porn the site is decent. If you're a fan of asian porn there probably isn't much here you haven't seen before or would want to keep. I got everything I wanted within the 3 days so I couldn't see staying for month.
Overall, average site, average score. Book it Dan-o. |
|
10-31-08 05:23pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
634
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
Reply of
xbigvmanx's Review
Hey Xbigvmanx. Just wanted to say welcome to PU. As a heads up, people (including myself, not trying to hide behind this one) are going to want to see more content in your reviews. What you have now is pretty thin. Once you qualify for the weekly drawing you'll also find out that more in depth reviews will earn you more raffle tickets. Hope to see more from ya.
|
10-30-08 08:29pm
|
Reply
635
|
Thai Chix
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Review
Thanks for the review here. Just wondering what the picture size is on the photos there?
|
10-30-08 02:14pm
|
Reply
636
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I'll probably have to go with Toadsith and say pro cycling (for some reason I'm addicted to the Tour De France) since the Seahawks and Vikings suck so much this year.
|
10-30-08 01:21pm
|
Reply
637
|
18 Eighteen
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Mmmm. I just looked at the TBP facts and they only have the limited access 3 day trial being listed. The full access trial is no longer listed on the TBP site either, so, that was the basis for my comment. I altered it to make it clear the full trial isn't on the table any more.
|
10-27-08 08:24pm
|
Reply
638
|
Phil Flash
(0)
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Review
Hey, I dig you're marketing approach to getting trust votes here. Never thought of the direct sell method in reviews. Just curious, what size do the photos come in?
|
10-27-08 02:18pm
|
Reply
639
|
Buy My Socks
(0)
|
Reply of
badandy400's Comment
This does sound like a slightly different kind of place on the net. You used to see more sites (or at least I did) a few years ago where you could buy lingerie a girl had worn for a scene. Never seen a site developed around buying a specific article of clothing. Frankly, my socks get pretty damn tepid after a day or two, I can't imagine that some girl's feet stink any better after a week. Definitely a fetish niche site / catalog if there ever was one.
|
10-27-08 02:15pm
|
Reply
640
|
N/A
|
Reply of
roseman's Poll
I said "not sure" because while I think the idea is interesting I don't think the technology is there yet. By "virtual porn" I think of a situation where you get to control or direct what happens in a scene; not the super duper futuristic sex with your computer type stuff. I think there are too many programming hurdles and too much expense associated with doing it "right" where you would come out with a decent affordable product at this point.
|
10-27-08 11:22am
|
Reply
641
|
Amateur Allure
(0)
|
Reply of
The Clyde's Review
Thanks for the review here. I've seen the site but never joined. As I'm more of a picture guy I'm wondering what the size the photos come in at?
|
10-24-08 06:02pm
|
Review
642
|
18 Eighteen
(0)
82.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
+ Almost all exclusive material focusing on the "teen" niche with 7 years of material available
+ No DRM
+ All pics come in 1600x1060 format with zips
+ Updates 5 days a week
+ Good $3 3 day full trial and $20 monthly membership through TBP |
| Cons: |
- Navigation is a pain but tolerable
- Primarily a photo site but there vids available
- Cancellation can be an adventure keep your sign up info on hand when you do cancel
- Some advertising on site to buy their products
- Older vids are very big and some only come in clips
- Inconsistent image sizes when you zip download |
| Bottom Line: |
18Eighteen.com is proof once again that abstinence only education does not work. 18Eighteen started out as a magazine and apparently continues as such as well as the website. Like most porn magazines, they haven't fully embraced the on-line aspects and as such the site does suffer a bit.
Navigation is a pain in the butt. There is a model directory but it is pretty bare bones and offers no real preview of whats available. Most of the images are in the monthly magazine section. You get about 9-12 updates a month there. You have to click on each model to see what their set contains. Then they have other sections where updates are sometimes posted. You really have to dig through the whole site to find everything.
All the models have photo sets with the large pics. Like others have noted, if you do a zip on the older material you might get something smaller than 1600x1060. That seems to have been fixed with the newest postings. I thought the images were mostly good quality although some of the older stuff gets grainy in the large size. I did notice a couple of dead links on the images.
The models are not glam, for the most part they are attractive teens. Most of the material is softcore with some dildo action and you get about 4 or 5 exclusivee hardcore sets per month.
You also get access to the now expired Babyface mag images which are mostly softcore. Their achieve goes back to 2001 with Babyface only having about 16 months (100 models) worth of material.
Like I said this site isn't really about the vids. Download speeds were just OK but the older vids sometimes only offered clips and came in at 320x240 on wmp. The newest vids come in at 640x480 but the majority are in the smaller range. There are probably around 100 vids and dvds, maybe more.
I have been a member here numerous times in the past before they jacked their fees and excluded the full trial last year. It's good to see this discounts back. Cancelling was a little strange. My info was not listed on the processor site and I had to cancel through the website itself. I did not get a cancellation confirmation email until the next day. A little strange but it worked.
I like the fact that the teens are cute and natural (no plastic here) and the production value is pretty good. It's almost all exclusive and, being a picture lover, this is good site in my book. If you've never been you could probably get all you wanted through a couple of trial joins but at $20 a month that wouldn't be bad either. It's not worth staying for more than a month unless you're a really big fan of the content.
I would score this site in the high 80's if they got their their navigation fixed, fixed some of the technical problems and had more movies available in the larger size. A very good site to check out on the trial though. |
|
10-24-08 05:44pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
643
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
Basically all of these are annoying as hell. I'd have to say that the misleading advertising is the worst of the bunch. Sites that promise exclusive material or certain models or scenes and, poof, it's no where to be found past the tour pages. Sites that try to sucker you in with the misleading stuff are probably the worst because then you're not even getting what you paid for.
|
10-24-08 12:05am
|
Reply
644
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
Good re-review. I won't harsh on the 98 score (that subject has been beat on and analyzed enough in the forum). I will note that I agree that the technical aspects like the easy zip function put it near the top of the heap. The content and price is also very good in comparison to some other sites. Personally, I wish they had more exclusive material than just Blue Fantasies and some of the other add on sites.
|
10-22-08 06:20pm
|
Comment
645
|
18 Eighteen
(0)
|
|
10-22-08 04:47pm
Replies (3)
|
Reply
646
|
N/A
|
Reply of
asmith12's Poll
For those of us with stoneage monitors pretty much 1024 is the standard I'd say. I'd love to go bigger but since my monitor works fine I don't see any reason to upgrade ... unless of course we get another Chinese paid stimulus check in the mail in the next few months again.
|
10-22-08 12:11pm
|
Reply
647
|
N/A
|
Reply of
elonlybuster's Poll
For me it depends. On the amateur sites, you sort of expect to see it. The pro's, not so much. Either way, it's no big deal to me. And so long as were talking about fantasy here, if I put myself in the actor's position, for a lot of these chicks I sure as heck be bothered if I wore a condom.
|
10-21-08 06:29pm
|
Reply
648
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Poll
I didn't even know that alta vista and dogpile were still around. Even though Google is starting to develop a Microsoft like reputation for my money it's really the only game in town.
|
10-16-08 05:59pm
|
Reply
649
|
Lifetime Anal Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
apoctom's Comment
My advice is that if it's too good to be true than it probably is. I've never tried one of these lifetime sites but my general feeling is that the networks are 1) all nonexclusive material 2) probably don't have a lot of bandwidth or quality, and 3) you have no idea how long the site will be around (years? months? weeks?). Personally, I'd save my money for something that's more of sure thing.
|
10-16-08 05:56pm
|
Reply
650
|
N/A
|
Reply of
roseman's Poll
I don't find IM very interesting or useful and I don't have any friends who regularly IM so I pretty much leave mine sitting by itself on my desktop.
|
10-14-08 02:25pm
|
