| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
51
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
Like hotdogs and politics, it's usually better to just see the finished the product as opposed to how it's actually done.
|
10-26-15 11:54am
|
Reply
52
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
Cat hair ... but not by choice.
|
10-20-15 07:03pm
|
Reply
53
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Point well taken. You could spend all your time looking at good porn but I'd probably be doing something else with my moola ... maybe dating pornstars?
|
10-12-15 11:42am
|
Review
54
|
Wicked Pictures
(0)
73.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
+ Large amount of all hardcore content (700+ DVD's with about 4200 total scenes).
+ Updates several times a week, averages about once a day.
+ Mostly exclusive content (some teenmegaworld content being added now).
+ Get access to their parody vids.
+ Mostly professional production values.
+ Good TBP price of $15 month |
| Cons: |
- Navigation, tags, search and model directory all suck.
- Almost all scenes use condoms if that's an issue for you.
- Prechecked cross sale on signup, lots of advertising within the site itself. Site has upsells too.
- Live shows are dead (but you can buy old ones).
- Not really a picture site (almost all scenes have pics with zips though).
- Poor file labelling (just numbers)
- Download speeds are all over the place (I ranged from 1-2 mb/sec to about 100 kb/sec)
- Lots and lots of very generic porn that gets old fast with a lot of the same contract girls.
- Lighting can be really bad at times.
- Oldest vids are very low quality and I couldn't get many to play. Reliable scenes only go back to about '93/94 but are, understandably, quite low res.
- Lots of music in the vids that continue up to only a few years ago.
- You don't necessarily get all the new Wicked updates, new updates can be content that was released years ago (I think you you have to upgrade to get the hot "new" stuff). |
| Bottom Line: |
I was debating whether to even review this one but the lack of recent reviews sort of made me buckle down with a few drinks and pound this crap out. In short, I was a member here back when the pyramids were being built and thought it was a decent site. However, my return was met with a completely overhauled site that left me scoring it a 73 only for the shear volume of content. Here goes nothing:
PICS: The newest scenes have awesome sized pics (2500x1600) but the pic counts are very low. It's only in 2013 and earlier that you get any decent number of pics (pics end in 2006). However, by late 2011 the pic sizes drop to 800x500 which is pointless by today's standards unless you like looking at pics on your phone. The pics all have large watermarks too.
VIDS: The newest vids are good sized and look good. However, by late 2011 the quality quickly drops and you get a lot of psuedo HD stuff (540 HD) that it just OK looking. Music starts appearing in the middle of the action as well. Had some issues with vids being way too dark. Lots of closeup shots and a lot of single camera viewpoint shots (guys, at least move the camera around once in a while).
NAV: This part really sucks. You got 84 pages of scenes that come up and you can only jump 2 pages at a time (note, just type in the page you want in the url address to avoid this). The scenes are poorly tagged, too generically tagged to be useful or not tagged at all. The model directory is not complete and often misses the group scenes. Model directory can't be searched alphabetically, only searchable by "likes" and "recently added". You get the point yet?
Overall, I can't recommend this site unless you got the royal hots for some of their contract stars and want to complete your collection. Too much "blah" generic action that, if you couldn't see the naughty bits, would be featured on late night HBO. Lots of hot girls but the action and way it's shot with lots of closeups and fixed cameras just dulled my brain. Basically, this site seems more like a dumping ground for Wicked as opposed to an online flagship effort. |
|
10-08-15 12:47pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
55
|
Aunt Judy's
(0)
|
Reply of
standard's Review
Great review on a site that probably won't see much of the light of day around here.
|
10-01-15 01:00pm
|
Comment
56
|
Babes Cartel
(0)
|
|
09-17-15 08:54pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
57
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
Most of the good stuff is replaceable with just a few hundred bucks of memberships and some downloading time. Hell, it would cost more to replace my old c.d.s and l.p.s than my hobby collection. Then again, my whole collection is backed up on one external so it wouldn't take but a moment and it certainly weighs less than all my other crap.
|
08-17-15 01:13pm
|
Reply
58
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I say the old thread because otherwise (if it's something I've already commented on) I feel like I'm just repeating myself or else I ignore the newly revisited topic. Creating lots of new threads is good for drumming up immediate new interest but gets old if you're a regular.
|
07-30-15 12:49pm
|
Reply
59
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I vote "undecided" as I don't have any philosophical objections, just the observation that most people (male or female) who go topless probably shouldn't.
|
07-11-15 12:53pm
|
Review
60
|
Pure Mature
(0)
79.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ About 215 scenes of exclusive milf / mature hardcore action featuring mostly attractive gals.
+ All scenes have vids and about 98% have pic sets with zips.
+ Multiple download options on vids and vid quality is good. All vids have at least one HD download option.
+ Good download speeds for me (about 3-4 MB/sec).
+ Decent price of $18 month through TBP.
+ Bills through Epoch.
+ The inbrowser video player works well.
+ Good production values across the board.
+ Model directory seems complete. |
| Cons: |
- Not really a picture site (see below).
- Downloaded files and vids poorly labelled (just numbers).
- Too much music in the earlier produced vids.
- No real search function or tags. No model information.
- Pretty much M/F hardcore, not much anal or 3 way and zero solo or lesbian if you're into that.
- A bit too "heartcore" for my tastes.
- Updates only once a week.
- As one sort of expects with the older actresses, there is a lot of silicone to look at. |
| Bottom Line: |
Wasn't really sure what I'd be getting here when I signed up other than a more mature line of starlets. Overall, it's pretty much a straight M/F hardcore site featuring pornstars in their late 20's to late 40's. The girls are mostly attractive pornstars (no BBW) and the production value is good to excellent across the board (no amateur feel to it). Here's the specs:
PICS: Like I said this isn't really a picture site. The pics dating from the beginning to late 2014 have portrait resolution of 1500x2700 but only have landscape resolution of 1500x840. What went wrong there? Others are a hodge podge of different sizes (a lot of 1000x1500 though). The most recent pics are all 1000x1500. The pics mostly look like HD screen grabs so there is some blurriness and cropping is questionable at times. A lot of scenes are shot in bright light or white backgrounds which causes some pixelation and washout. Most of my downloads were done in hopes that I could salvage some stuff that would look good on my monitor as opposed to looking forward to editing the sets later.
VIDS: Download speeds were good for me. With earlier vids you get options 1080 mpeg or wmv or 480. Starting in 2014 you also get 720 resolution options. This mostly a "heartcore" site which means lots of bright background lighting. The older vids show a bit of pixelation because of this but it improves over time. Also, through late 2013, the theme was "heartcore" (aka - porn for mimes) meaning that no one in the scene makes any real sex noises. Apparently the producers noticed that and thus incorporated random porn synthesizer music into various parts of the scenes to take it down another notch. The music goes away for the later vids (late 2013 onward) and the action gets more heated but there are no real story lines or conversation in the vids. The camera work is decent though and you do get some nonstandard views which is welcome.
NAV: As noted, it's pretty basic. You can only search according to model, date or ranking. If you are looking for something specific in a scene then you'll have wade through everything to find it because nothing is tagged.
MISC: There is a fair amount of POV style shooting here (run by remote or a cameraman, not the herky jerky hand held stuff done by the guy). The scene shifts in the vids can be a bit choppy at times too. Otherwise, the main theme is heartcore or heartcore with a slight edge. No real slapping or spitting here which is fine by me but it's almost too tame, especially if you've seen some of the actresses other work. As a comedian once said, "If the sex ain't dirty, you ain't doing it right."
If you're looking to add to your mature video collection it's worth taking a look at. Otherwise I'd say it's OK. If you're into pics then I'd say move along. Average is the site so average be my score. |
|
06-25-15 05:14pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
61
|
Team Skeet
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
They were fun but it took a lot (and I mean a lot) of time to put together and I just haven't had time to spare the last few years. Additionally, the "pickings" have dropped off quite a bit the last few years as the forum has really quieted down.
|
04-29-15 01:52pm
|
Reply
62
|
Team Skeet
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Mmmm. Just cleaned out my cache and clicked on the TBP link for the $10 monthly trial and I just get a dead page link. Maybe something wrong with my browser or something else.
|
04-29-15 11:50am
|
Review
63
|
Team Skeet
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Over 1800 hundred scenes of mostly attractive younger gals getting their sexy on across a 20 site network.
+ No DRM or download limits.
+ Bills through Epoch, no prechecked cross sales.
+ Updates about 5 times a week.
+ Mostly exclusive content (LustHD and Rubateen sites are just 18xgirls / teenmegaworld content)
+ Good quality vids with good download speeds and multiple download options.
+ Newer vids have tag jumps where you can jump to a specific sex act while streaming. Video streaming works well and has several settings.
+ Navigation is basic but it works well. |
| Cons: |
- The listed TBP price of $9.87 doesn't apply, monthly price is about $18.
- Ads, ads, ads, ads. Ads everywhere.
- Not a picture site, max resolution is 1600x1000 and only goes back a few years.
- Production quality is just average and drops down to amateur on some sites.
- All vids pretty much labelled "HD" although the older content isn't.
- Some sites are dead or update sporadically. Most update 1 to 2 times a month.
- Nothing terribly unique or exciting about the content overall. A generic porn hub. |
| Bottom Line: |
You know you're getting old when I know the last time I visited a site now included in this network PU didn't exist and I was in the last days of a 56k connection. A bit of nostalgia got a hold of me and I decided to take a look again and was pretty much left feeling "meh".
This is a 20 site network with Innocenthigh and Xtrasmall being the two best sites. Perhaps by coincidence these two sites have most of the major porn stars on them too. The network feature mostly US porn stars and a mix of amateur or very short lived porn starlets and the main focus is on hardcore porn (really no anal for those so inclined). Here's the skinny:
PICS: Like I said, this isn't a pic network. Pics max at 1000x1600 but by mid 2013, drop to 1050x750. With sporadic updates, it doesn't take long before you've hit the low end on most sites. Lots of action from vids missing on pics and cropping leaves something to be desired. Several sites may only have a few dozen pics. Scenes that do have lots of pics mostly feature the preshoot tease pics. Not a lot to see here.
VIDS: All sorts of download options (WMV, MP4, HD and standard resolution) as well as different levels for in browser streaming. Download speeds were consistently good (about 3 MB/sec for me). The stream function worked well and I like the tag jump function. You get HD starts about late 2010, before that you have the old standard sized vids. Vids also have screencaps.
NAV: Navigation, although basic, works pretty well. No dead links, everything worked. Tags as usual can be a bit spotty but seem pretty consistent here. The best way to search is by site or by model. Only limited model info provided.
OVERALL: For whatever reason, I wasn't terribly impressed with the site overall. I don't use a DL manager and I was still able to look at and download everything I wanted in about 6 - 8 hours.
A very consistent theme is felt given that a lot of models appear on many of the sites. The POV sites, Teensdoporn and Shesnew sites all had an amateur level feel to them (low production value, spotty lighting and single cam, usually operated by the man). Even the more interesting sites had average production value and some questionable camera angles. There's nothing terrible about the site but, then again, nothing great either.
I see that Maggie just finished a review here giving the network a score of 90. That is definitely too high of score for what you get in comparison to other hardcore sites at that level. In my opinion it's decent network so that's what my score reflects. |
|
04-28-15 09:16pm
Replies (7)
|
Reply
64
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
About the only way to get by in the 21st century without wifi is to live alone, own one computer, don't use a smart phone and don't have a tablet ... which basically means you don't live in the 21st century.
|
03-28-15 12:43pm
|
Reply
65
|
21Sextury.com
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Reply
The credit system is basically worthless as it currently works. You get about 300 loyalty credits for a months membership and that allows you to buy one scene "forever" if you register your email with them. Guess I prefer the concept of "forever" meaning what I download and store myself. Currently, you can't use them to offset the cost of a membership.
|
03-08-15 05:32pm
|
Reply
66
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Dorsai6's Reply
Cool. Good to know for future reference.
|
03-08-15 05:28pm
|
Review
67
|
21Sextury.com
(0)
94.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
+ Good deal at $15 a month for almost 40 sites counting the lesser quality bonus content.
+ 8500+ scenes of exclusive mostly Euro porn with daily updates.
+ Lots of hot models and a good variety of h/c, lez, solo and some tranny. Overall high production value and quality.
+ All scenes have both pics w/ zips and vids
+ Pics are large, going up to 7300x4900 in a few cases.
+ 5 vid download options and stream function.
+ Pretty decent navigation which is rare in my book.
+ Good download speeds (600 - 2,000 MB/sec across multiple channels was usual).
+ Bills through Epoch and no prechecked cross sales. Home page also displays how many days left on your subscription. |
| Cons: |
- Many of the sites are dead or only update sporadically leaving about 10 truly active sites.
- A fair amount of anal for those not so inclined.
- More material is being farmed out to secondary producers now and the quality takes a hit on these scenes.
- I had difficulty getting the stream video function to work well (I had to run the vid about 15 seconds, pause it and let it buffer for a bit before being able to jump forward/back).
- Limited model info and interaction. The Fanclub where models interacted is now dead.
- Pix and vid don't always include the same content and some of the sites were painfully predictable as to which hardcore positions would be featured, especially on the pics.
- Especially for pics, the camera work needs to improve (see below).
- Some cross selling, especially for other 21stsextury sites that share the same portal hub.
- File naming is poor (just a number). |
| Bottom Line: |
I found it hard to believe that it had been five years since I was last here but my hard drive coffers are now restocked and joy has spread across the land. I always liked this network, even when it was just stand alone sites way back when, and it finally hits the ceiling on my score list. Here be the nuts and bolts:
PICS: Starting in the second half of 2010, the pic sizes jump from 1200x800 to about 3700x5800 and some sets go even bigger. All scenes have zips and have between 100 and 300 pics. Due to some of the large pic sizes, you can get zips exceeding 1 gig in size so be prepared to self edit if you don't hoard disk space. Overall quality is generally quite good. The pics appear all on one page which is nice but when viewing inbrowser you can't enlarge a pic to it's full size.
My main beef with the pics (and this goes to other sites who have introduced large pic sizes) is that you can't rely on autofocus any more. Most of the pics are either screen grabs from the HD movie or separately shot using a narrow range or "dot" autofocus. This works for distance shots or when the body(s) are perpendicular to the camera. However, when the model angles away the result is that a good portion of the body gets slightly out of focus and is annoying. I tossed a lot of pics because of this. It gets really bad on Footsiebabes now and I had to chuck entire sets just because everything but the feet where out of focus. Clearly they have cut back on photography like a lot of othere sites but the over reliance on a narrow focal range gets noticeably bad when you jump to very large pic sizes.
Some of the super sized pics also look grainy at full size meaning they just used screen caps or blew up standard pics beyond their limits.
VIDS: Downloads available in 1080, 720, 540 and 2 phone sizes and most vids are 20-30 minutes long. 1080 starts appearing about 2 years ago. It's not super high end 1080 but it looks good. I downloaded a lot in 540 and it still looks good on my monitor. Other than an issue with the stream player, everything was cool with the vids.
NAVIGATION: Usually I rip sites on their navigation function but I don't have much bad to say here other than "it works pretty well". I never pay attention to search by tag because tagging is never consistent and on a site this size any search simply dumps 100's of scenes on you. Best way to go is by model (the directory seems complete) or by individual site or by network update date. The sites are listed on the side bar. You just click and go. Only real negative is that they need a better page jump system. With some sites topping 100 pages they only let you jump a couple of pages at a time. That's an unnecessary time killer.
OTHER: As noted above, some of the content is produced out of house. AnalTeenAngels and Gapeland use the same models and production as you get with Teenmegaworld. There are more scenes now with U.S. models which are also outsourced. The production value isn't as high with these sites and they get repetitious quick but it isn't terrible by any means. A few sites where also predictable in that you know exactly what every scene would look like in terms of positions.
The most active sites are ClubSandy (sadly, Sandy is not in front of the camera any more, she still looks great I think), Assholefever, Analteenangels, Cutiesgalore, Footsiebabes, Gapeland, Lezcuties, Picsandvideo, and DPFanatics. The other sites are dead or update less than once a month.
The stuff from early 2010 and before is lesser quality (1200x800 pics and 540 sized vids) but that's to be expected. The content is still good and I think looks almost better in terms of models and production value (not comparing to today's world) than some of the most recent stuff.
Despite my incessant bitching, which is common in my reviews, I admit to really liking this site. It has very good production values. Most scenes offer some story line (not a lot of gonzo) in different locations and usually start with the models clothed and then working down from there. You got a ton of variety in terms of content and a lot of different girls. Hell, I even grabbed some content from the "lesser" bonus sites which still had an acceptable level of content and I almost never do that. It has great looking content going back for over a decade and is a great value.
Thus, I plant my flagpole atop 21sextury and proclaim it "King" of my review hill. Not a bad way to finally crest the "100 points" on the review hill. |
|
03-04-15 02:07pm
Replies (6)
|
Reply
68
|
Lez Cuties
(0)
|
Reply of
MargulisAZ's Comment
I just finished a subscription to 21sextury and while I spent very little time on this site it did look like they had some new content and that it updated every few weeks. How much is actually new? I can't say for sure.
|
03-04-15 12:59pm
|
Reply
69
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Porn is sort of like a restaurant in that once the entree breaks the $30 barrier you start to lose the customers. I'm a cheap bastard so even the $30 limit is high for me but that doesn't mean there isn't great stuff or niche stuff above that line.
|
03-04-15 12:58pm
|
Reply
70
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I never do the "Free" trials with the exception of DDF that no longer offers them. I have done some $1 trials in the past but only if they're through a reputable billing company and the terms and conditions make it clear that I got time to cancel before the trial ends. In other words, look before you leap.
|
02-28-15 01:08pm
|
Reply
71
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
I would say some combination of "all of the above". Dimensions alone don't define HD. Actually, I guess I don't even know what a standardized definition of HD is any more. Too lazy to Google though.
|
02-06-15 12:36pm
|
Reply
72
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
Well, I stand corrected. I think the main people here have with this is the word "DRM". Too many bad connotations for us old timers. Given how much personal information we give up to social media and big data every time we fire up our browser, I don't have much of a problem with this any more.
|
02-01-15 12:32pm
|
Reply
73
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
I hadn't really heard about this before. It makes sense from the production end and doesn't mess with legitimate users so I don't have a real problem with it. My guess, though, is that it's probably easy to defeat the codes or block them if you know what you're looking for.
|
01-31-15 01:38pm
|
Reply
74
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
A lot of old stuff that goes also can't legally be reproduced any more because of the all the documentation required now to show consent, age, etc. Also, who really owns the copyright to the old stuff is hard to track down. With porn being relatively cheap to produce I can't see many willing to go the expense and hassle of reclaiming the oldies and then updating them to current acceptable standards.
|
01-24-15 04:23pm
|
Reply
75
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Unless you're set on watching your collection on a 60 inch HD tv or monitor then "the biggest" doesn't always make sense.
|
01-22-15 12:26pm
|
