| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
1
|
Student Sex Parties
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
Cute girls.
Girls (for the most part) don't look like porn stars.
Exclusive content.
Bonus sites with WTF pass. |
| Cons: |
Unbelievably bad camera work on the majority of videos.
Photo albums are often incomplete AND redundant.
Often videos contain girls that don't get naked or only topless.
Distracting and annoying subtitles and MOVING watermarks.
Other peoples niche chocolate in my porn peanut butter. |
| Bottom Line: |
STUDENT SEX PARTIES has every single problem that modern porn is guilty of:a propensity to try to satisfy too many niches that should NOT be part of porn sought by the demographic that seeks orgies: I would say MOST of this demographic do not want to see CFNM,(clothed females naked males)urination or worse.(seriously, what kind of a twisted twist wants to see girls getting "sick" in porn) We want to see naked girls! Often girls don't even get naked, or the camera is at an angle so we only see men's butts. Not a pretty sight.Also,girl's stripping (one of the most erotic ingredients to good porn) is often either completely missing, avoided or badly botched in extreme close-ups. Speaking of camera work. Hire a professional please! None of their "frat boys" seem to know a thing about head space or framing and the constant attention-span whiplashes often made me sea sick. In some videos it was so bad, it ruined the video and I deleted it. The ONLY time the camera seemed to stop for any period and hold still, was for the many, many, many blow jobs. Then there is the distracting subtitles (who cares what inane things they say! And trust me, they say quite a plethora of inanities)and ESPECIALLY the site's little MOVING postmark that mar EVERY single video. The downloads were incredibly slow.(one site took me 2 months to get through-often wasting hours only to find that that video could not download and I had to try a different download option) As to the rest of the "bonus" sites. Only ONE reason I even bothered to look at any of them: to find girls that didn't get naked in Student Sex Parties for "completion." Sometimes I did. Many times I was frustrated. Oh,one more thing:WTF stop insisting these parties are real and not staged with porn actors. Stop insulting our intelligence so you can get away with all of the stupidity above! Overall, a few decent picture sets and video, but A LOT of garbage to wade through. If you are OCD like me and a completest, you will have many hours editing the videos to subtract the redundant, gross and annoying watermarks.Not worth more than a month of your time. |
|
11-10-13 01:48pm
Replies (2)
|
Review
2
|
Haze Her
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
Cute girls.
SOME photo sets are clear and high quality.
Good basic concept. |
| Cons: |
Only 4-6 girls on average get totally naked.
Don't be fooled NOT REAL!!!
Some photo sets are not so clear.
Photo sets seem to promise on average 500-1000 photos. BUT most sets have nearly the exact set of photos in triplicate. Expect redundancy.
Some photo sets don't ZIP.
Some Screen Caps (happened three times)don't ZIP.
The concept of lots of naked girls in a sorority is fine. It doesn't need the callous and disgusting "humiliation" trend.
No bonus sites. Pricey for 15 sets.
don't exist and you are treated to 642 shots of a title page. |
| Bottom Line: |
If it was anything else NO ONE would excuse
this site's callousness, sloppiness and constant technical obstacles.
What a bloody disappointment this site has been.
Hey look, I know The Bang Brothers are secret homosexuals who just care about, apparently, seeing a man's dick every thirty seconds but for us STRAIGHT guys when you put 15 cute girls in a room but only 4-6 ,on average, get naked it's NOT COOL.
Whoever thought that this is even remotely acceptable is a bloody twit.
In addition, should a zip drive take HOURS to load. I don't think so. Don't have that problem with other sites...
The Bang Brothers are consummate con artists. The only reason they claim their websites are real is because they are greedy and lazy. By using the "reality" cover they can pay porn stars more cheaply to be extras.
The reality cover also, apparently, supplies them a reason to hire ADD afflicted cameramen who have NO idea on how to frame a shot. (for ten years I worked making movies-so I DO know)
This laziness extends to the pic sections. Instead of editing for only the best they throw batches of redundancy at us and we need to do the extra work to weed them out. Often the screen caps are too blurry to be of any use.
They could just forgo the screen caps IF the pictures showed ALL the action, but of course that would mean more thought and care into the process and they must insist (no matter if it's so ridiculous a notion as to be ludicrous) that the sites are "reality" based.
(don't fool yourselves:they are NOT real. Several websites have done the research for me. I have a list started and one by one I am filling in the porn stars for each set...)
Here is the thing. I DON'T CARE if it's real. I don't really want it to be. It's all about fantasy.
And most porn companies RUIN that fantasy over and over again by mucking it up with awful camera work that inspire you to reach for the Dramamine, (not your dick) CFNM and CFNF, callousness (this whole humiliating trend has to go) and just plain grossness.
The bottom line. CUTE GIRLS SHOULD NEVER BE EXTRAS IN PORN. You bring out a gun in act one. It should be used in act two.
I hope to the superior being of your choice that SOMEONE finally wises up and actually creates a website for straight guys that want to see multiple girls get totally naked at parties without the stupidity of CFNM or CFNF which leads one to do extra work cutting everything out so that just the girls that get naked remain. |
|
07-30-12 03:02pm
Replies (2)
|
Review
3
|
Tainster
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
This is a mega site that includes the two powerhouse flagships Drunk Sex Orgy and Party Hardcore. Beautiful women. Good cinematography. Quality video downloads. For those into C.F.N.M, extreme bondage, and other like minded trends, there is plenty to admire. |
| Cons: |
Tainster, to begin with, is an awful name and it is an omen to what tastes the creator has decided to focus on. This sight has been built from the superior bones of Orgy Maxx. Eromaxx has always been a very bizarre frustration for me. Drunk Sex Orgy, one of the most brilliant ideas in the porn universe: huge orgies shot with quality equipment in sophisticated nightclubs, has been rendered nearly impotent by it's constant fantasy betrayals, like using the same exact cast while 75% of the rest of the girls remain fully clothed. Frustrating and ridiculous. Another great idea: the shower hose on stage, is usually rendered a prop for more frustration. Very rarely do pretty girls get naked under it. They just tease us in between the "set" cast pieces. Party Hardcore is even more frustrating. I don't care if it's real or not. Seeing 6-7 girls get naked out of 75-100 is, again, frustrating. Those are the two big flagship sites. Rest, in my opinion, should NOT even be bundled with orgy sites. |
| Bottom Line: |
I was disappointed years ago, but it still had enough promise that I went back hoping to find the old Orgy Max stuff in better quality (I only have lousy MPEG versions of the old stuff)as the founder promised back in 2010.
To my shock, Tainster had pretty much taken them all out! Drunk Sex Orgy only has the events from 2007 on, while Wam Sex is completely gone, replaced by soft core All Wam.(where in many of the events no one even gets naked!)
Instead Tainster offers up useless cam shows (in an upgraded package) and sites that feature Bukkake, C.F.N.M, or worse. (not my cup of java) And then there is the silliness of Party Softcore. Um,... note to the special kind of idiots: TOPLESSNESS IS NOT PORN!!!
There is SOME good stuff. Enough for say, a months perusing. There is a fair amount of pictures and videos. Even entire DVDs.(but if you are like me and hate to watch anything over 5 minutes on your computer, it means probably transferring the MP4 format to a DVD player format with a significant loss of quality)
However, the death of the old Orgy Max material is the major tragedy, as there is NO place to buy this material. (I should note, I have purchased every one of the D.S.O. and Party Hardcore DVDS, except six, to date. I plan on editing them into much more fantasy enabling, but with better music, masterpieces some day)
As to the actual Tainster site itself, it is not as user friendly as it could be, with very noisy menus and clunky features.
The price has been lowered a little since the Orgy Maxx days but it still is nearly $40.00. (depending on the dollar fluctuation of the Euro) A bit steep for those interested in only the straight orgy sites.
But if you like C.F.N.M, Bondage,Bukkake and the like, you will find much more to enjoy here.
Me? I am going to start wearing black all the time. Grieving for the loss of Orgy Maxx and the incremental decline of non frustrating porn in general... |
|
07-29-11 01:17pm
Replies (6)
|
Reply
4
|
Tainster
(0)
|
Reply of
Jaimes's Reply
And years later it is still pretty much the same. A VERY slow leak of the older Erromax and most of the rest, garbage. Adding new sites that are useless unless you are into bondage and gross outs. The REALLY good older stuff, yet unreleased. The newer stuff, getting less exciting by the minute. I said it years ago: porn has been broken, for good.
|
07-01-16 05:05am
|
Reply
5
|
Student Sex Parties
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Reply
60 IS probably too generous. But for the 10 or so videos where all the girls DID get naked, in the end, (after much editing) it might be worth a month.(but not two)Still, compared to something like DARE DORM this is a much better site. DARE DORM is a vicious crime against porn humanity. Talk about purposely and remorselessly torturing viewers. 3 (maybe 4) if your lucky out of (many times) groups of girls, get naked on an average DARE DORM. I fast forwarded the last DVD in 20 minutes and saw NOTHING worth keeping. The camera work was EVEN worse than S.S.P. S.S.P. is closer to COLLEGE RULES where SOMETIMES all the girls get naked but often, not so much. Other torture sites to be wary of: MOFOS and BANG BROTHERS. And if you sense a bit of redundancy in porn these days it's because most sites are owned by three companies: MANWIN (now MINDGEEK), TAINSTER (used to be ERROMAX) and the entity calling themselves MOFOS...
|
11-10-13 07:05pm
|
Reply
6
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
Simply when a porn star doesn't look good anymore. Seriously does ANYONE want to see Ron Jeremy naked anymore. Just sayin'
|
11-10-13 01:26pm
|
Reply
7
|
Tainster
(0)
|
Reply of
International M's Reply
International M: as a former member (several times throughout the years) and as someone that has seen EVERY DSO and Hardcore Party that has been released in the United States. I must note, that yes, you have 3000 scenes BUT, once you take away the gross out sites, you are left with maybe 3 decent ones. Out of those, several of the sets were incomplete or had technical problems. Not to mention the quality of creativity is sub-par, with the same casts over and over again. I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times-including complaining while I was on the site: TAINSTER has ruined, not only a decent idea (Erromax was flawed, but it was still leagues above Tainster) but porn in general, by creating copy cats. The sad thing, is that this COULD be the best site on the scene if it jettisoned the gross sites, (bundle the gross sites together for the German market and bundle the orgy sites together for the straight orgy porn lovin' individuals like me)stopped hiring extras and hired girls to at least get completely naked, AND brought back all the old Erromax stuff you have been hoarding, promising for years to release, but refusing to.You do that and I will finally respect you in the morning.
|
11-29-12 09:50am
|
Reply
8
|
Haze Her
(0)
|
Reply of
elephant's Comment
Elephant, that's what it MAY seem, but the fact is far from the fantasy. First off, these are not amateurs. (which is fine because many are very cute)All you have to do is Google HAZE HER: identify girls and you will see a plethora of message boards dedicated to tackling the fact that most of these girls appear elsewhere. Secondly, the strap-on scenes insure that whoever has the strap-on will not be getting totally naked. Also for the most part, don't count on orgies. This is mostly controlled 3-4 girls on average. Sometimes more. But rarely. And never full on orgies. Finally, the whole "humiliation" thing is not fun. It's ugly and ruins the fantasy. Especially when men acting like pigs are involved.
|
08-08-12 10:26pm
|
Reply
9
|
Haze Her
(0)
|
Reply of
marcdc1's Comment
Yes, that is correct: no previews! It is just another way that this company insures you are mislead into thinking their site is more than the sum of it's parts. You are probably doing yourself a favor steering clear of this site. Good call.
|
08-08-12 10:14pm
|
Reply
10
|
Haze Her
(0)
|
Reply of
elephant's Reply
Yes, some cuties, but for me if they don't all get at least naked, it really kills the fantasy and becomes more frustrating than titillating.
|
08-08-12 10:11pm
|
Reply
11
|
Haze Her
(0)
|
Reply of
elephant's Reply
Elephant:I agree that there are definitely some hot moments, but mitigated by the frustration of not seeing the girls naked and the very ADD addled camerawork. And yes, this is the same insidious symptoms that haunt almost every single party site. I think in large part, because Drunk Sex Orgy was so successful, this became the norm. Sad truth is for most, it works, but for some of us it ends up being frustrating. While I would like to see all the girls have sex, I would be happy if at least they got entirely naked. None of this just topless BS, either. In one particular set: NEW PLEDGE DICK SUCKING. Only ONE of the girls even gets entirely naked! There is really no excuse for this other than the money the producers are paying out. It has been proven that 99% of the girls on these sites are all up-n-coming porn stars.
|
08-03-12 02:36am
|
Reply
12
|
Czech Mega Swingers
(0)
|
Reply of
oldguy's Review
Good review, in general. I am thinking of joining but more interested in pics. Does the site include pics? Or just videos. I can't believe that no where on the internet is this information available! The site SHOULD tell you what's it's going to include but, of course, it doesn't. Also: do the subtitles distract? Do they cover up any action? I hate that... Any additional news would be appreciated.
|
01-08-12 07:16pm
|
Reply
13
|
Tainster
(0)
|
Reply of
petefountain's Reply
petefountain:thank you for your response. Indeed, I did not mean to offend anyone. But I do think that C.F.N.M should stay in it's own backyard, so to speak. But more and more it is seeping into all kinds of porn; from Parodies (Not Married With Children) to websites.(the aforementioned COLLEGE RULES, DARE DORM and FUCK TEAM FIVE all have had their share of C.F.N.M seepage. Also V.I.P., V.I.P. CREW and REAL SLUT PARTIES)Sometimes you get lucky, but most of the time they show you a bunch of cute girls (and waste a lot of time doing so) that don't even get naked. As you alluded to, on average you might see 2-4 girls actually get naked or participate. (and in the case of Party Hardcore and Drunk Sex Orgy almost NEVER the real cute ones that the cameramen seem to tease us consistently with) In the scheme of things, say, when you compare it to real issues like Global Poverty and possible Nuclear War,it is a niggling thing, but gosh,it is damn annoying
|
12-27-11 04:16am
|
Reply
14
|
Tainster
(0)
|
Reply of
qted's Reply
qted: Exactly! And adding Gina to Party Hardcore is not particularly
a bonus-she never gets naked these days, and it is odd that when the males M.C. they always get naked, but when it is a girl, she never gets naked. Does no one realize that it would be far more exciting if the female M.C.s got naked (or even participated once in a while) while M.C.ing. Sadly I do not see this trend waning. Too many people like C.F.N.M. Myself, I just don't understand the appeal at all.
|
12-27-11 04:05am
|
Reply
15
|
Tainster
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Reply
Mbaya, you are right. It is an unfair judgement call on my part. I should have been more specific and said, that, in my opinion, it is sick to me. But I still maintain that certain genres should be kept out of the mainstream. I still maintain that C.F.N.M is ruining porn. I watch porn to see girls get naked. If you don't, that's fine, but please don't have it leak into my genre. This is not the movies where you can mix and match genres and it's fun. This is porn. I see cute girls, I want to see them naked. Just like in a mystery; you see a gun in the first act, it better be used by the third. I can't tell you how much this frustrates me. It is simply inconceivable to my brain that folks would enjoy this torture but again, to each his own, just don't let it leak into MY mainstream.
|
07-31-11 03:39pm
|
|
