| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1401
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from rearadmiral:
(pat362's Reply)
I'm with you. I purged my collection last year but couldn't part with some classics even though they're low resolution. I'm always on the hunt for more.
|
12-17-14 06:02pm
|
Reply
1402
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from rearadmiral:
(pat362's Reply)
Good point. If VB, or any other site, followed your suggestion I'd sign up for a long-term membership to support them.
|
12-15-14 05:53pm
|
Reply
1403
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from rearadmiral:
(pat362's Reply)
While I agree with you that it would be great if VB would licence and upload some older titles I don't know that they'd be better served overall. I'd love to have access to a wider catalogue of titles from good studios from the 1990s and 2000s.
But the problem with that is that's when guys our age started to get access to good porn and it means something to us. And guys like us are creeping into 'old man' category but some standards. So the younger members might not appreciate these older titles like we would.
I would definitely support a site that gave me decent quality old Anabolic/Diabolic stuff. And many other studios. Maybe I could fulfil my dream of owning every scene Tammi Ann or Inari Vachs did.
|
12-15-14 04:17pm
|
Reply
1404
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
from Schirm:
Hi Pat
I noticed you put a remark about video quality in the cons list. Would you mind elaborate on this a bit?
Taking aside newer hd scenes, would you say that files suffer from too hard compression, low bitrates etc? What filesize would a typical 30 min full frame (4:3) scene be, roughly?
I figure the main alternative would be Videosz, where I found the quality to quite satisfactory overall. Is Videobox on the same level?
|
03-23-14 02:42am
|
Reply
1405
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from jberryl69:
(pat362's Reply)
I think we see the same thing - my comment was made specifically in regard to the buttons that say "View ALL ..."
|
07-14-13 12:15pm
|
Reply
1406
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from benmar51:
(pat362's Reply)
You are, of course, correct. . . But, the point I was trying to make was, as a VB member, you can get access to their current list of Elegant Angel movies for a TOTAL cost of $2.00 (Simply wait until the last 3-4 days of your monthly VB subscription to "jump in", DL, and "jump out".. . .Also, since many of Elegant Angel`s scenes are close to an hour, the custom-clip feature at VB comes in real handy. . .Anyway, it was just a thought. . I enjoy your comments. . Have a Merry Christmas.
|
12-22-12 09:18pm
|
Reply
1407
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
from Monahan:
Excellent review.
My adds:
A big uptick to VB for its continuing effort to list the cast for most of its material.
A big downtick for its incorrect spelling and/or identification of the cast names which, with the size of their catalogue, makes it impossible to find all of the material for a specific performer.
A big uptick for the quality of member commentary. Many members are true pornophiles who know their stuff and are willing to share.
A big downtick for VB's laziness in making corrections in cast member names that are identified by members in their comments.
I've been a member since 2005 and it's still my favorite source for my stash, especially when they exploded from one update a day to 5 or more a day. But I do agree with the score for all of the reasons cited.
|
09-05-12 09:17am
|
Reply
1408
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from rearadmiral:
(pat362's Reply)
I think we're mostly in agreement. I have to have the sound off a lot of times for 'strategic' reasons. But when I am able to listen to the sound too I prefer no music at all. I'm so used to no music in much of what I watch that it seems obtrusive when it is there - even if it is subtle.
One possible exception is the original music that X-Art uses. I don't necessarily like it, but I will admit that it adds to the mood that the site is trying to create.
|
09-05-12 04:11am
|
Reply
1409
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from rearadmiral:
(pat362's Reply)
I didn't, but I do watch a lot with the sound off too so I'd be less inclined to notice that.
|
09-04-12 05:15pm
|
Reply
1410
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
from rearadmiral:
Great review pat. Regarding your comment that you might be in the minority since you don't find VB all that great, I think you're both right and wrong. As you say, VB is an excellent site for someone who is just starting to collect porn so you'd be in the minority among most people. But here at PU, I suspect that you're in the majority. I like VB and I'll keep going back, but I really wish they'd make it a better site and concentrate more on quality than quantity.
I also strong agree with you that it is frustrating that studios on VB don't make more of their catalogue available.
|
09-03-12 05:01pm
|
Reply
1411
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
from Tree Rodent:
Good review, I see you scored it very close to my mark. This place could certainly do with more quality over quantity, but maybe in the current climate, that's all they can do on the budget. Many videos and scenes listed as new, are just old ones which have been repackaged, which is often noted by members.
|
09-03-12 09:06am
|
Reply
1412
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#14
from slutty:
(pat362's Reply)
It certainly would have been good for him to mention his complaint was about VB3 in the comment, as this is certainly the basis of his complaint, but I have seen many people post comments that are quite negative, as well as reviews that are quite negative. Isn't this the point in having a review site, so that people can posts their opinions of sites. I would be intersted to see mike's scores of VB, I like to read negative reviews and comments, even of sites I enjoy, as it helps me see other folks perspective.
|
08-07-12 08:23pm
|
Reply
1413
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#12
from slutty:
(pat362's Reply)
I understand what you are saying, I just don't think this type of reaction due to frustration is all that uncommon. I agree it gives a negative spin on his feelings of VB, but he is free to give whatever spin he pleases. I guess I just don't see a problem with it. I agree VB is one of the highest rated sites, but personally I think it is also highly overrated. Bitching in the forum may be prudent, but these are also threads that quickly disappear which some users may never notice or know to look for.
I see plenty of negative opinions in comment titles over the past few months, why can't he post the same? In what way is his sentiment (VB3 blows, which I strongly agree with) not valuable information for casual users looking for site reviews? What if the current workaround of using VB2 goes away? Sorry for carrying on this debate, it just seemed like you sort of jumped on the guy.
|
08-06-12 11:09pm
|
Reply
1414
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#9
from slutty:
(pat362's Reply)
I don't really see a problem with posting a comment like this before waiting a few days, people do this here all the time with respect to login issues, download speeds, and other technical issues. Clearly he has had some issues with the site over time, and he should feel free to voice his opinion, may be useful to fellow PUs.
|
08-05-12 10:36pm
|
Reply
1415
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from mike11w:
(pat362's Reply)
Why wait a full day? The VB3 portion of the site just doesn't work. They have loaded it up with lots of fancy options, which if they worked, would be great. But these options add a lot of overhead to the system which can't be supported by the current infrastructure. So the site is a POS. I can go into the VB3 portion of the site in mid-morning and the updates are missing and the site in so slow that it logs you out before a page can load. If I switch to VB2 the updates are there and the pages load very quickly. Maybe you should spend some time on the site and think about what is going on before you post in haste. I am a long term member of VB who has seen both the quality of the movies and the site infrastructure go to hell in the last couple of years.
|
08-03-12 06:31pm
|
Reply
1416
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from messmer:
(pat362's Reply)
I think they are the victims of their own success, Pat!
|
01-31-12 10:31am
|
Reply
1417
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Bletch:
(pat362's Reply)
Yep. My score was more or less based on the 'crappy' download speed.
Videosz does compares to Videobox when it comes to content - give or take a few titles.
I'm not sure what you mean when you disagree about the joining fee. I thought it was reasonable, but you think it's really good? Bad? Also note you paid $15 but I actually paid $24(£15).
Thanks for taking time to reply :)
|
06-26-11 01:34am
|
Reply
1418
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from RustyJ:
(pat362's Reply)
Well, they have Private and Harmony that I consider top studios in quality although their Private content is older which I actually like more than the new one.
Still bit confusing about those two I mentioned in first comment. Could the Kink actually mean kink.com and what is actually available from them?
|
12-11-10 11:44am
|
Reply
1419
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from messmer:
(pat362's Reply)
Yes, I do wish they would produce more porn along the lines of the stuff that was made 20 - 30 years ago, Pat, yet at the same time I could put up with new and flashy if they indeed presented something new and flashy instead of an endless repetition of scenes that look identical except for the faces.
I'm done with DVD sites for a while because I was just as discontent at Videosz and Porn.com, for the same reason. And don't let anyone say I'm becoming jaded from over exposure because good stuff when I come across it now and then still turns me on! :-)
|
11-01-10 07:16pm
|
Reply
1420
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from messmer:
(pat362's Reply)
You put your finger right on it, Pat, in what you wrote. I think my problem is that basically anything 5 - 10 years old is generally done Gonzo style and, as I stated in another reply, this is a way of making Porn that I am indifferent to. I hate it when one moment a model is fully clothed and then the next completely naked and in the middle of action and if basically one DVD after the other starts and ends the same with the same action in each it does tend to get tedious.
|
11-01-10 09:42am
|
Reply
1421
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from messmer:
(pat362's Reply)
Fair enough, Pat. You certainly do get your money's worth at Videobox.
BTW, I liked your review of Videobox, just reacting to the high scores it has been getting, not only from you but from others, including TBP. But then I rated it more highly myself first time around. :-)
|
04-05-09 11:26am
|
Reply
1422
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
from messmer:
Pat, don't you think that, "Although they offer a large library of studios and movies. I consider that about a 1/3 to 1/2 of these studios offer substandard content or repackaged scenes.", should be enough to take this site out of the nineties?
|
04-04-09 12:53pm
|
Reply
1423
|
VideosZ
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from johnsch8:
(pat362's Reply)
Did you actually read my post? I wasn't able to get a login issue resolved due to no reply from support at that site. Which means I was a member. Make sense?
I'd just like others to know that support in my case was nill. Next time read the fuking post.
|
03-22-15 06:34pm
|
Reply
1424
|
VideosZ
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from messmer:
(pat362's Reply)
I completely agree with your assessment, Pat! That's why no more DVD sites for me once my long term subscription to VB expires.
|
03-11-13 02:07pm
|
Reply
1425
|
VideosZ
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from Clement:
(pat362's Reply)
Hey Pat, thanks for the update :)
I'm not sure we'll get any new Puritan videos but we can definitely get JM production, we were already speaking with them about adding their line to VideosZ :) We definitely like old movies and new movies here, so we're adding everything we can!
Thanks again for the feedback!
|
12-05-12 08:48am
|
