| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
76
|
Backroom Casting Couch
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#11
from rearadmiral:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
LOL! I think that's the best possible description of that site. I find the models are far less attractive than with ECG and BRCC too.
|
01-01-14 05:32pm
|
Reply
77
|
Backroom Casting Couch
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#9
from rearadmiral:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
It was pretty plain but functional even a couple of weeks ago.
I'm not a fan of Net Video Girls. The site is a mess and the videos aren't great either. I did download some stuff but not much of it.
|
01-01-14 07:35am
|
Reply
78
|
Backroom Casting Couch
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from rearadmiral:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Thanks for your comments.
Has the site been redesigned in the past few days? My membership expired last week and when I went back to the tour pages they look different now.
|
12-31-13 08:59am
|
Reply
79
|
Backroom Casting Couch
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Comment
from elephant:
Yeah I much prefer Epoch, always fair and easy to contact with any problems that occur with a site. Sadly lots of adult sites though don't use them like they did and have their own payment processors that I hate cause I don't feel its a safe as buying via Epoch or even ccbill, least you know they are professional and not some company that make it really hard to cancel and use you card to add on sites you never signed up for.
I too used to love the shop, such a shame it no longer works.
|
12-28-13 01:47am
|
Reply
80
|
Backroom Casting Couch
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Comment
from uscue:
Epoch overall is always a better experience for me. I'm just upset they deleted the "shop" page where you could browse every epoch client and sign up directly from epoch for whatever membership you wanted.
That said, how is this site? I noticed no reviews from anyone in over a year, but I'm finally interested in taking the jump. Curious if it's worth it at the 24.95 price point
|
12-27-13 09:07pm
|
Reply
81
|
Backroom Casting Couch
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Comment
from pat362:
I've always found that Epoch's conversion rates are far better than CCBill and that's why I'm always happy when Epoch is the CC processor
of the site I'm looking to join.
|
12-27-13 07:55am
|
Reply
82
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Roberto281:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Right now, Bang Bros is featured on TBP home page with a rating of 90 yet, there are loads of scam billing complaints on this very same site. I guess scam billing is not an element of a site's rating. It should be. Apparently, the more important issue is whether TBP gets its commission checks for the referrals of its users.
|
10-26-13 10:36pm
|
Reply
83
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from SFguy:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
It also makes it harder to know what's going on with BangBros when you can join through so many different network sites - if I had seen this TBP page and noted all the user warnings, I never would have joined. I'm almost tempted to cut and past my warning message on all the TBP listings for all related BangBros sites as well. Just a really bad experience here, and yes, TBP needs to block them.
|
10-26-13 11:18am
|
Reply
84
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from pat362:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Basically what happens with BB is that you have a sign in page where your log in info is saved (at least it is for me) and from their you are first taken to what is normally a cam link page but today it was a survey page (which I took) on what customers think of the new site and then you are taken to the main BB page.
This is the sort of tricky page because you have little boxes with the names of all the BB sites but the first two are the only ones that you get with your standard BB membership and the first box is for a live cam site so you know that the term free is relative as I'm sure you would have to pay to actually see any action. All the other boxes have little captions underneath them saying either special offer or a save "X" %.
|
09-17-13 05:18pm
|
Reply
85
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from pat362:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
The main reason why I didn't crap as much on them is that they still produce good porn at a decent price and that's not easy these days.
Their little trick is more annoying than clever because you just have to look at the little caption below the links to see that you don't have access to the sites and that you have to pay to get them.
|
09-16-13 06:46pm
|
Reply
86
|
Black Cream White Ass
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Wittyguy:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
I like the idea of a "CIA covet" operation, it definitely has Biblical implications ... sort of what canceling might be like here. This one caught my eye because it has a 3 day trial which is usually enough time to cancel. If this offer is still around in a week or two I might test the waters after digging through the fine print on the sign-up page and confirming that they use a reliable billing processor.
|
03-11-09 11:47am
|
Reply
87
|
Black Ice Pass
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from slategrey:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
My guess is what pat said, it just died. The last couple of dvds this studio released were all compilation. So I dont think they have any new material to add to the site. But im still holding on to the hope/chance that this is just a long hiatus for them because i really enjoyed there content.
|
02-27-12 10:29am
|
Reply
88
|
Boat Girls Gone Wild
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Comment
from Capn:
Highly commended! ;0)
It is a shame that more agressive action isn't taken against scammers like these & those who use regional pricing.
As ever it is the underhand principle of this that really annoys.
It tars the whole industry and should be addressed.
Cap'n. :0E
|
09-06-12 11:33pm
|
Reply
89
|
Boat Girls Gone Wild
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from gaypornolover:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
That is absolutely shocking Squirrel but well done for highlighting it. We porn consumers need to take a stand against this kind of unethical business and show we're consumers like everyone else and we deserve respect. Together we'll do it - thankfully we have a great forum here to do so.
|
09-06-12 12:17pm
|
Reply
90
|
Boat Girls Gone Wild
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Comment
from lk2fireone:
I am nominating you for an honorary PU badge for Leading the Charge for Fair Porn Practices.
Seriously, your warnings do help the rest of us in saving our porn dollars from attempted fraudulent practices.
And maybe Khan should consider awarding you an extra badge, whether honorary or real.
|
09-06-12 01:49am
|
Reply
91
|
Body Parts.biz
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from RagingBuddhist:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Thanks, Squirrel
Personally, I like the closeups, maybe as just a change of pace. But I'm with you on the glossy vs. amateur. This could be a great site - but it definitely needs a lot of work.
I guess it needs to be said that there are a few full body shots scattered throughout the site but, as it bills itself as "the closest close-ups on the web!", I wouldn't figure it will appeal to those who prefer the big picture.
|
03-03-12 05:19pm
|
Reply
92
|
Brain Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Review
from Brainpat:
Hi,
Thanks for very extensive review. You guys are very serious about your reviews and what you write is the kind of feedback we like to read and take in consideration so that everytime we make change, we know what direction to take to make our network not just better, but hopefully the best.
Once again, thank you for taking the time, but also to consider the Brainpass network in the first place.
Pat (AKA Brainpat)
|
06-01-09 06:19am
|
Reply
93
|
Brain Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Review
from mbaya:
It is very interesting that we basically agree on the facts and overall impressions, but differ on that intangible of how interesting a network or site can be. I suppose I am just a bit tougher on the site and expect more. Thanks for mentioning my review as being accurate.
|
05-28-09 07:35pm
|
Reply
94
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from RagingBuddhist:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Very well put. For some reason, I never stopped to think about all the people who simply don't join and therefore can't rate the site. Now the numbers make sense - sort of. I guess it's all subjective to begin with but, to me, if you have more than three or four cons, a site still couldn't rate in the high 90's.
|
03-11-09 11:47am
|
Reply
95
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from TrashMan:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
I think the only reason I docked Brazzers a couple points was because of the content, due to the lack of variety with the type of girls. As noted in my cons, there aren't many updates for girls (a lot of one-and-done girls), let alone a good amount of girls who have A/B/C cups. Another thing I looked lowly on, but failed to say in my review (but later noted in my review of Reality Kings) is that Brazzers focuses too much on a select few girls (e.g. Eva Angelina, Gianna Michaels, etc.). Reality Kings, on the other hand, spreads out their content over more girls...I don't remember the numbers but its like 24 updates for Eva at Brazzers, and something like 7 over at RK. And similar numbers for Gianna.
Reality Kings has a better variety of girls than Brazzers, but the Brazzers site is just a better and more enjoyable site to use. I think reviewers should put more weight on the design of a site than the content, because, what good is good content if you cant find it or get it easily?
I don't disagree with you that the Brazzers content is not perfect. It does get old, fast, especially if you don't like girls with huge racks. But that doesn't mean it isn't good. It is good fucking, good length, good production, good clothing, good video quality, good variety of type of scenes, good looking girls, quality male characters, etc.
Compare this with Ed Powers: poor quality videos, annoying old fat guy talking to the girls like a douche, annoying old fat guy with a puny dick screwing the girls, poor production, etc.
It is also important to note that big tits sell. Pornstars get implants because they know that the big bucks start rolling in with a huge pair. So to downrate Brazzers for catering to their audience would be incorrect.
|
01-19-09 06:02pm
|
Reply
96
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from TrashMan:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
I rarely downgrade on the type of content. The enjoyment of the type of content (be it the genre, the clothing, the type of sex, etc.) is in the eye of the beholder.
Personally, I hate the idea behind Ed Powers' website: some old fat guy screwing hot newbie chicks on the same bed...over and over and over. But the reason I pulled their rating down below a 60 was not because of the type of content. Sure I am not very fond of it, but the site is just generally bad - no downloads, all streaming, the quality of the videos are crap, updates post Dec 2008 are all but nonexistent, etc.
Same goes with Brazzers. I am not particularly fond of the type of girls Brazzers shoots for, that being the blonde bimbos with D+ cups, fake or real. But the big reasons I gave Brazzers a 98 is because the site is just a pleasure to use and everything about the site is a pleasure. The content isn't BAD, nor is it distasteful (see Max Hardcore for distasteful), it is generally well produced and well made. And couple that with a website that is one of the easiest to use and features everything you want out of a website, and you get a 98 rating.
When I rate a website I look for a list of things, and if they are missing then I start to downgrade.
That list (for sites like Brazzers, with exclusive content, not DVD-based content like Videobox):
*download quota, or lack thereof (Reality Kings marked down big from this)
*download manager support (jesus come on, this is the age of queuing files and letting them download overnight)
*proper named girls (is it that hard to get the names right and not use some alter ego?)
*videos accompanied by high quality images (hey I can understand websites like VideoBox not being able to do this since the content is not in their hands, but for sites like Brazzers where the content is entirely in their control not doing it is a major letdown)
*ability to download galleries in ZIP files (come on now, get with the times)
*high quality videos (there better be at least 480x360 resolution available, 640x480 preferred)
*site search (an absolute must for ANY porn site)
*pornstar list page (an absolute must for ANY porn site)
*a decent update schedule
*decent price (anything over $20/mo, forget it. $20 is like the break even point...anything above gets down-rated, anything below gets up-rated)
And these are things where I don't down-rate for not having, but will up-rate if available:
*screencaps from the video
*headshots of girls in a pornstar listing page
*ability to rate material
*ability to comment on material
*quality bonus material
*forum to discuss the site
*more than one format of videos (it is a lot of work and space to host videos in multiple formats, and those sites which do the more power to them)
There is a lot of other things I come across when rating porn sites, which make me either down-rate or up-rate the site, but when it comes to Brazzers there was not much I could find on which to down-rate.
|
01-19-09 05:06pm
|
Reply
97
|
Broke Amateurs
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from rearadmiral:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
I can say for certain that unless there is a download option that exceeds that I certainly won't be back.
|
10-07-13 02:41pm
|
Reply
98
|
Broke Amateurs
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from rearadmiral:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Good point about the quality issue. If you offer HD for sale then more people will buy it. I'll confess to occasionally visiting tube sites to scout out material from a site I might be interested in. Tube sites have led me to join several pay sites but I only use them when planning a membership.
The thing about this site is that I really like the scenes and would gladly become a repeat customer if the video quality was better. Honestly, I could even live with the 720x480 stuff, but if the site is reverting to 320x240 I won't rejoin.
And as I've said probably a dozen times here already, an answer to my emails from the site would be helpful in clarifying what's going on.
|
10-06-13 12:59pm
|
Reply
99
|
Broke Amateurs
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from rearadmiral:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
Thanks for the comments.
The worst part is that I don't think the site has been left to die. It is still updating with new material but the site owner seems to have made a decision to drop the semi-good quality downloads in favour of what might have been state-of-the-art in 1995. And all to thwart piracy. I get that piracy is a big problem, I get that it must be one of the most frustrating things a small site has to deal with, and I get that the site can't tell someone like me from a person intending to upload the material to a torrent site, but this move seems to penalize me for doing nothing wrong.
That's the frustrating part for me. That and the fact that the webmaster doesn't respond to emails.
|
10-05-13 01:24pm
|
Reply
100
|
Bryci
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from merrell:
(Tree Rodent's Reply)
ok the squirrel, i believe you have right on the point, but in this case i have never seen that: only one hour and already reject permanently, it's insane, i'm being duped.It seem i'm not alone in this case. All the more as, the content do not as terrific as i've believed.
|
09-14-12 02:33pm
|
