> Well thanks for sticking it out, ... it is always nice to run across other people who enjoy the activity
Thanks to you, it takes two to tango :-).
> I'll admit I often have the habit of arguing another side just for the sake of arguing, it isn't in my nature to concede an opposing party's argument
So do I, but as long as we admit this habit, it can't be THAT bad :-).
I agree with most of your arguments, but on the other hand... IMHO as 3D Sex Game is ALREADY ranked on PU against Hands on Hardcore (they're shown in the same list according to the ranks, BOTH in "browse sites" and "hardcore sex" sites), we need to try to put them within the same ranking system, or those pages will become misleading.
If PU admins will decide to completely separate interactive games from the rest to avoid placing them in the same list - it would be a completely different story (and I wouldn't argue against such separation), but now they ARE within the same system, with rankings directly compared to each other, and IMHO we need to take it into account.
As for difference in "how much we enjoy this or that site" - I don't see it a problem, and completely agree that it is what this site is all about :-).
Ok, I will change reference to "3D engine" to "3D graphics", thanks for pointing it out (as I've said, I'm NOT into these things, I'm just a user).
About being impossible to compare apples and oranges - well, aren't we doing it here all the time? :-) What I'm trying to do is to put ALL the reviewed sites on scale of "how much I enjoy them"; and IMHO my ratings are pretty consistent in this regard; now it became even simpler as I have lots of sites to compare new ones with, and it's quite easy for me to say that I enjoy 3D Sex Game about the same as Naked News, MUCH more than Newbie Nudes and significantly less than Met Arts.
Also while everybody can choose their own criteria, I will explain why I prefer "my" approach (try to rank everything) to "your" one.
There are two problems I see with your approach (ranking only "apples to apples"). The first one is the question "what is the niche narrow enough to compare?" Shall we stop separating ONLY 3D games or it shall be done for ALL niches? And then - shall we separate, for example, ATM from Anal as being the same or different niches? In the very extreme case we can even say that all sites are unique, but it will make any ranking completely worthless. The second problem is that when new user comes to the site, he easily can see "the best sites" by overall rating right on the home page; but at this point he doesn't care about "best in class" thing, he wants "the best overall entertainment site", and "global" ranking (opposed to "per-niche ranking") is REALLY important there; another incarnation of the same problem is that sites are usually labeled as multi-niche ones, so if 3D Sex Game is compared to such sites as "Hands on Hardcore", which means that they shall have the same ranking scale. Just IMHO though :-).
Well, everybody has his own opinion , that's what this site is about :-).
About comparing 3D in ActiveDolls and 3D Sex Game - right, models there are anime-style, but in a sense they are MUCH more human because they have human movements and face which expresses something, and animation is IMHO FAR better there; also I don't really care about fancy features used like some-kind-of-shaders or DirectX v10 (I'm not game developer, I'm just a user). It is overall "feeling" what matters to me, and on this scale I DEFINITELY like ActiveDolls engine MUCH better; if trying to figure out what this "feeling" consists of, probably it will be naturally looking movements (including animated face) and overall "polished" interface (I didn't see minor rendering "glitches" in ActiveDolls which are abundant in both 3D Sex Game and 3D Stripper).
On the other hand, if you feel that "3D engine" doesn't cover all the 3D aspects and is all about shaders and such, I won't argue :-). My point is (and was) that overall "feeling" of 3D graphics and animation is IMHO MUCH better in ActiveDolls than in 3D Sex Game (and 3D Stripper COULD be brought to the same level IF they will get rid of those "glitches", will get rid of "jumps" between different dance segments, but to get significantly higher overall entertainment value they will also need MUCH more than a single girl).
> this makes it the best of games available and I graded it as I
> did in relation to the performance of its peers.
But I've tried to compare it's "entertainment value" NOT only to other 3D games, but to ALL the adult sites I know; that's probably where the difference in our ratings comes from.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
++ quality of graphics is good
++ variety of actions is large
++ variety of toys is HUGE (including sex machines)
++ variety of outfits is large
++ variety of locations is HUGE
+ customization of almost everything (vagina,penis,body,...)
+ "Sex Coins" pseudo-currency to keep things interesting
Cons:
-- animation isn't so good
-- out of all the actions, a few are duo and VERY few are 3-some
- VERY few pose changes are animated
- undressing is not animated
- convoluted interface (tutorial and "hints" required to play sex game? Come on).
- need connection to play
- slow web site
- Downloading 65M update right after download? Gimme a break.
Bottom Line:
Continuing my quest in looking for a good 3D sex game, I've tried 3D Sex Villa (this is the game which you get when subscribing to the site). Well, after all the good reviews about it on PornUsers I was quite disappointed (it's definitely not bad, but IMHO doesn't warrant 90+ score).
First of all, to clarify - it is yet another "3D sex game" along the same lines as ActiveDolls and PlaySexGame - you have models, put them into some location, choose position and tell them to have sex. That's fine. At the beginning most positions, locations and models aren't available, and you need to fuck around a bit (literally) to get more (when having sex, you earn so-called "Sex Coins" to spend on "sex packs" which include positions or
toys or models). That's IMHO even better to keep things a bit more interesting.
But then comes a worse part. First of all, controls are convoluted; while the game has tutorial on controls, it's not really what I expect from rather primitive sex game. Also while graphics itself is good, animation isn't IMHO so good; I even doubt if they used motion capture to animate things (it looks more as a good imitation of physical model, than mo-cap), and faces have VERY limited animation. Outfits don't always fit good, and penetrations aren't always "clean" too. Overall, IMHO 3D Sex Villa's 3D graphics+animation feeling is SIGNIFICANTLY worse than that of ActiveDolls.
On the plus side, overall variety is HUGE: you can choose from REALLY HUGE set of models, outfits, locations, plus can customize almost everything (most of variety comes in "sex packs" but as long as it costs nothing rather than playing, it's perfectly ok with me). As some drawback to this variety, I want to mention that while they've added threesomes, they're EXTREMELY limited (formally there are 5 threesome actions, but some are so similar, that I'd say there are only 2).
And IMHO all that variety didn't make it significantly more interesting - it's still all the same routine of selecting location, moving to position and asking the girl to fuck. Models lack personality, so changing them doesn't really help, positions aren't too different, and outfits don't look too "natural", so apparently despite all the variety it still looks pretty much the same all the time, with some real variety added only by a few special locations like "Fetish Club".
Bottom line: while this game definitely outperforms ANY other 3D sex game I've seen in number of available options, action still looks pretty much the same. Overall, my feeling is that it's "entertainment value" is about the same with "ActiveDolls" (3D Sex Villa has MUCH more options to choose from, but ActiveDolls have IMHO SIGNIFICANTLY better 3D graphics+animation). So I've rated it the same as ActiveDolls.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
++ very original idea
++ video quality is EXCELLENT
++ mood/attitude/personality of the girls is EXCELLENT - they enjoy it
+ fun to see news anchor undressing
+ different outfits and strip patterns
+ pussy haircuts
+ cheap
Cons:
-- about 50% of the time there is no undressing, girls start nude
-- there is at least one girl which is outright UGLY
- very few REALLY good-looking girls
Bottom Line:
I've re-joined "Naked News" recently, and shall say I've got mixed feelings about it.
It is still news and the girls are still stripping while reading them, and it is still one show every day. The girls are still stripping to all-nude, but not more (not even anything "pink", no teasing, nothing). That's what the site is about, and I don't see any problems with it, just want to be clear.
The first problem I see with it is that while they have some variety by adding different outfits and strip patterns, about half of the time girls start nude, so there is no room to strip further, and no variety :-(.
The second problem is while they're hiring girls who enjoy it, and that's perfectly fine, but there shall be some minimal look standards; there is at least one regular girl which is IMHO OUTRIGHT ugly, and for me it is a major turn-off. I don't have problems with "average-looking" girls there (most of their girls are average-looking and I'm ok with it as long as they have nice personality, and they usually do), but this one is different.
On the positive side, it looks that site has started to pay some attention to make it a bit more erotic: while there is still no "pink" and no "teasing", it looks that girls have started to make nice pussy haircuts :-) (warning - you won't see any close-ups of it, the view is always like in the "normal" news - either full-height or above-waist).
Bottom line: a site which can be fun to see for a month (if you're ok with "just nudity"), but as a long-term fun I don't really see it happening. It IMHO even became a (tiny) bit worse than a year ago because of problems outlined above, and it's reflected in the score. If they would add more stripping variety (outfits, stripping patterns and so on), and pay a BIT more attention to girl looks (I REALLY like girls smiling and have no problems with "average looking" girls, but there shall be some minimal standard) it IMHO could help significantly.
Deal :-). And what do you think about my idea (not sure if you've read it or not) to "penalize" sites with such PRE-CHECKED upsells by deducting, say, 10 points from their ratings (clearly stating that 10 points were deducted for PRE-CHECKED upsell during sign-up)? I'm likely to do it in the future (unless somebody gives me a reason why it's a bad idea), and would like to see more people doing the same thing; I'm not sure, but if webmasters read this site (and at least some do), it MIGHT help.
But if we shout about it loud enough, don't you think that it could help Epoch (and sites using Epoch) to stop it? After all, if SUBSTANTIAL portion of people will prefer CCBill to Epoch, sites using Epoch will be in disadvantage.
I'm happy to see porn together with her (it happens, but not too often), and her fantasies about bigger cock are perfectly ok with me (as long as they're fantasies, but this is all the porn is about).
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
+++ beautiful locations
+++ beautiful models
+++ mostly right mood of the models
+++ professional photography
++ "best of FEMJOY"
+ daily updates
+ variety of video formats
+ reasonable default for pic size (fits into normal screen)
Cons:
-- nude-only, almost no undressing
-- movies are recording of photoshoots
- no "extras"
- lack of categorized search
Bottom Line:
After trying MetArt (see my review) I've decided to try another top-rated site with about the same idea. As a result of reviews being that close, I will mostly compare these two sites.
But first, I shall note that screenshot on PU doesn't do justice FEMJOY's home page - it looks really ugly, while FEMJOY's design is very clean and clear.
Now to site comparison on different accounts:
1. "Art". IMHO MetArt is a bit better in this category (while FEMJOY is good, MetArt's pictures are IMHO a bit more "artistic", at least the covers).
2. Beauty of the girls. IMHO about the same ("stunning" is the right word for it).
3. Mood of the girls. As it was mentioned about MetArt, girls there look "bored"; as Monahan has put it for MetArt, "There is no real "fire" in many (most?) of the pics". It is IMHO MUCH better with FEMJOY, so FEMJOY is a clear winner here.
4. Quality of photography. IMHO about the same (MetArt has better "covers", but FEMJOY gets it IMHO a bit better "inside" galleries).
5. Beauty of locations. IMHO MetArt has a bit better locations overall.
6. Variety. Because of clothing and undressing on MetArt, they win this one.
7. "Extras". Free web-cam obviously brings MetArt some extra value.
Bottom line: these 2 sites (FEMJOY and MetArt) represent about the same niche, and while they obviously have their differences, overall I can't say that one is clearly better than the other one, hence the same rating for FEMJOY as it was for MetArt.
> There really is no defense for this practice.
IMHO there are different ways to defend ourselves:
- post BEWARE comments on PU;
- boycott such sites based on the logic that "if site is trying to swindle you one way, they're likely to do it in other ways too";
- MOST IMPORTANT: if hit by such thing, ALWAYS going to your bank and disputing the charge; I was told by banking guy that if some merchant starts to get many disputes, it can become VERY expensive for this merchant, and at some point merchant can even lose his credit card processing license.
> By all means it's certainly NOT only this site but a beware for ALMOST every site.
I don't think that I had ever seen it for CCBill sites, and I think it's ALMOST every Epoch site (that's why I don't normally join Epoch sites, unless they're VERY special). Do you have similar experience?
At last, webmaster trying to defend this kind of thing, how cute. Then could you please tell us if (as you're saying, I have somewhat different words to describe it) it is "WELL above" and "CLEARLY stated", WHY do you have it PRE-CHECKED?
IMHO there is ONLY ONE possible reason to have such things PRE-CHECKED: to hope that user isn't careful enough and will press "Subscribe" button without noticing it. And please don't tell me it's done "for my own convenience": if I would want to spend another $30/month, I wouldn't care to take another click to join. But other than that, all other explanations are very welcome.
> There is no real "fire" in many (most?) of the pics.
Exactly; thanks for expressing my feelings it this concise and exact way; IMHO it's a perfect way to describe it in one sentence instead of my long and maybe not so clear description.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
+++ beautiful locations
+++ VARIETY of beautiful locations
+++ beautiful models
+++ professional photography
++ variety of outfits
++ free cam
+ daily updates
+ variety of video formats
+ convenient navigation
Cons:
-- too much difference between cover page and gallery contents (see explanation below)
-- mood of some models can be better
-- movies are just recording of photoshoots
- resolution selection is not preserved
- obsession with bandwidth for movies (6Mbit/sec WMV is too much for me)
- lack of search
Bottom Line:
I've decided to join Met-Arts mostly because of cover pages of their daily issues, and those are pieces of art, really. But what really surprised and quite disappointed me was that inside their galleries feel quite different from the cover page. Met-Art doesn't "cheat", and "cover" is from the same gallery, but overall feeling is still VERY different. Sure, everybody selects the very best shot for cover page, but IMHO Met-Arts kind of contrast between cover and gallery itself is unusual both for paper magazines and web sites. Fortunately, Met Art has archives and IMHO back in 2006 and earlier this difference WASN'T THAT BIG. In general, I liked old galleries MUCH better. It's both good and bad to know, as on one hand, it means I can find galleries I like more, on the other hand, means that quality of Met-Art galleries (from my subjective perspective) goes downhill :-(.
Another thing that bothered me (and which isn't present on "covers") is mood of the girls. Granted, they're REALLY beautiful, but it is quite clear from the pictures (and videos) that most of them are just doing pretty boring job; I don't mind what they really think, but when it becomes obvious on the picture, then IMHO something is wrong. And again, this wasn't that much of a problem as late as in 2007.
In addition, I shall say that I'm not fond of picture sizes like 3328x4992: I never print such pictures, I don't have monitor that large, and don't think I will ever get one in foreseeable future (monitor with 4992 HEIGHT? even if such a beast exists, I'm afraid even to think how much it costs). I obviously don't mind about such pictures as long as Met-Arts provides lower resolutions, but I don't consider such HUGE pictures as an advantage too. But one thing calls for improvement, and it is that if I've selected "Mid-Res" once, then ALL the galleries shall start to be shown as "Mid-Res" (now they still default to "Hi-Res").
Bottom line: Met Art is one of VERY few sites on the Net with potential to make erotic ART, but unfortunately it (IMHO) doesn't realize this potential. Also I had a pretty hard time rating it, so to do it, I've compared how much I enjoy it with another softcore site I've recently joined - VirtuaGirlHD (I know it's apples and oranges, but I don't have any better reference). And IMHO MetArt's old galleries are about on par with VirtuaGirlHD (88), and recent ones are significantly lower, about 82, so I've took average (85) as an overall rating.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
++ 3D virtual photostudio with girls willing to pose
++ 6 different girls
++ EXCELLENT 3D graphics quality
++ WILD variety of outfits
+ option of g/g strap-on action
+ movements between poses are animated
+ free download to get an idea (no nudity and only one girl in free version, but quality is the same)
Cons:
-- limited variety of actions
-- duo (g/g) action seems to be added later and not so-well developed or integrated
- no b/g
-- undressing is not animated
- movements between poses sometimes look wierd.
Bottom Line:
This site is both quite similar and quite different from other 3D games I've recently seen (see my reviews of 3DPlaything and PlaySexGame). It is similar because it is downloadable real 3D game with ability to control camera angle, zoom, lighting and so on. It is different because of quality of implementation - ActiveDolls IMHO presents MUCH better 3D graphics, attention to details and overall experience.
First of all, you get six girls to play with. And variety of outfits to dress them is HUGE - I'd say it's at least a few hundred of different items. Then, you get a girl into some setting where you can tell her to change pose (moving is animated, but sometimes looks strange) or to undress (undressing is not animated). Then you can either to control her movements, or tell her to please herself, and then you get your virtual camera (even with lighting control and some effects, like sepia) to take shots of the girl and make an album out of them. Girls look VERY good, and all the details and UI are well-organized and convenient. What makes this game not so interesting is lack of sex and lack of variety; poses are the same in every setting, there is no b/g sex, and g/g sex is VERY limited (looks that it was added later and it isn't as integral part of the game as the rest).
Bottom line: so far clearly the best out of all the games of similar nature I've seen; still, lack of different actions limit it's attractiveness. On the other hand, if running photo studio with beautiful girls willing to strip and perform solo actions according to your wishes has always been an unsatisfied dream of yours, this game can be just for you.
> Seems like a unique thing, something I feel I need lately!
BTW, I'm in the same quest to find something unique most of the time, and I've just checked, 9 of my own "top sites" are unique in one way or another, so please feel free to check :-). While some maybe not "your cup of tea", you MIGHT be able to find something, as they're pretty diverse.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
++ real 3D sex (camera/angles)
++ different sex positions
++ includes solo, boy-girl and even MMF
++ lots of different outfits for the girl
+ skin tones and hair
+ CCBill as processor
Cons:
--- VERY limited action
--- action is too mechanical (just moving back and forth)
-- only one girl
- quality of 3D graphics is not so good compared to others (it's decent but not REALLY good)
- minor flaws in 3D interface (it may leave camera in position when it's difficult to see anything or move it)
Bottom Line:
First of all, a word of warning: this site (play-sex-game.com) has TWO different games and TWO different subscriptions. One is for Flash-game "Sambuka" (I didn't subscribe and cannot comment on it), and another is "Alice 3D", which this review is about.
After VERY poor experience with 3DPlaything (see my review) I didn't give up and continued to look for decent 3D sex games). And while "Alice 3D" by Play-sex-game is similar to 3DPlaything in it's idea, it definitely gives MUCH more than 3DPlaything.
Idea is very simple and as I've said, close to 3DPlaything - you can dress that "Alice 3D" girl the way you want and then put her into different sex positions, sometimes alone, sometimes with a guy or even two. Then you can control movements (actually controlling only the speed of movement, as movements themselves are pre-programmed for each position). And as usual with real 3D, you can control camera angle and zoom easily. Quality of 3D graphics is IMHO not so good compared to 3DPlaything, but it's still not bad.
Bottom line: while it wasn't too entertaining for me (IMHO action was way too mechanical), it can have some value for real fans of 3D virtual sex.
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.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
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.
