Ratings & Reviews
|
All the reviews and ratings from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
26
|
Naked News
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 4 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- very unique concept (girls read news while stripping);
- girls are very good (also very funny when necessary) in doing it;
- a funny way to keep updated about world news; |
| Cons: |
- can be pretty boring if watching daily, which is somewhat offset by different stripping patterns.
- stripping only;
- needs pretty good connection to work ok (when my ISP has problems with bandwidth, it stucks intermittently). |
| Bottom Line: |
Site is made by a Canadian company, with girls from all over the Canada, including French girls from Quebec.
Concept is pretty simple - girls read news (yes, real-world news with a slight twist towards entertainment), but the girls undress while they read the news. Girls are beautiful and read it quite professionally (which is a surprise). The biggest problem with the site is that if looking at it daily, it becomes pretty boring; they're trying to make it more interesting by changing clothing and strip in different patterns, but unfortunately there is not that much choice with really different stripping patterns, especially as they need to look into the camera all the time.
Bottom line: funny thing to try for a month, but most people aren't likely to renew (maybe in half a year or so). |
|
10-17-07 03:31am
Replies (0)
|
Review
27
|
Club Seventeen
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 5 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- models are just great, period.
- photographers work (lighting etc.) is top-notch without any doubt;
- 'public' live chat included into the price;
- live chat models are excellent;
- live chat setup is above-average. |
| Cons: |
- resolution isn't that good;
- navigation can be made better.
- live chat models tend to work good only in private;
- not much hardcore on site in general;
- pricing is in EUR, which currently means bad news for customers paying in $US. |
| Bottom Line: |
The site is about beautiful European girls, that's it. Mostly softcore, though they have hardcore section; softcore section is really huge, hardcore not so. Site is made by the same guys who make famous 'Seventeen' videos (which are REALLY beautiful; site is not exactly on par with their videos, but still very good).
They have live chat with nude girls included into the price, but girls are rarely enthusiastic until you invite them in 'private'. Girls seem to be either Czech, or Ukrainian; their English is usually 'fair', not 'excellent'.
Bottom line: recommended it you're into beautiful girls in really nice setups with really nice photographer's work and don't care too much about pricing. |
|
10-17-07 03:17am
Replies (1)
|
Review
28
|
Naked News
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+++ VERY original idea
++ girls seem to enjoy it
++ fun to see news anchor undressing
+ added more "unusual" strip patterns
+ added some public topless stuff
+ added a few great-looking anchors
+ pussy haircuts
+ video quality has improved from "very good" to "even better"
+ cheap, plus there is a "3 days free gold membership" promotion right now |
| Cons: |
--- about 50% of the time there is no undressing, girls start nude
-- even when there is some undressing, often it is just from underwear to nude |
| Bottom Line: |
When I've re-joined NakedNews about a week ago, my first impression was that the site operators did read all our complaints here on PU and paid attention to including more undressing in the news. I've even thought "Oh, I might keep my subscription beyond first month" (it doesn't happen to me too often ;-)). Unfortunately, it was just lucky few days :-(, and going through archives, I have run through numerous days where all the girls are completely nude from the very beginning :-((. Funny thing is that owners seem to know what people want, and in "News Off The Top" segment (which starts every day program) they show most of the girls dressed, but it only results in big disappointment when you anticipate some striptease and only get girl who's completely nude from the start :-((.
To be more specific, I've even went through the archives and gathered some statistics to share. Out of randomly chosen 15 days (taken in 2010), I have observed the following numbers (I cannot guarantee they're 100% accurate, I might have forgotten to add 1 here or there):
starting fully dressed - 13 times, starting in underwear - 23 times, starting fully nude - 43 times. I've also counted "unusual patterns" (like panties taken off before bra, or no panties under dress) separately, and the number for the same time was 13.
Overall, the site has stayed more or less the same since my last review, so I will concentrate on differences which I've found compared to my previous review here on PU (which can be found under "Archived" subtitle). First, I "feel" that amount of undressing has dropped (I didn't gather statistics back then, so I cannot tell exactly). Second, they DID add great-looking girls (I especially adored Whitney St John) - and it was one of my complaints back then. Third, they've added "Naked in the Streets" section, which is about the topless girl taking interview in streets or on the beach (loved it). Also addition of program with nude girl cooking was a nice one.
Video quality was very good back then, but now it is REALLY good (with probably the best streaming player I've ever seen).
Bottom line: it is still a site which can be fun to see for 1 month (if you're ok with softcore stuff), and I still don't think it can be interesting for a longer time. On the other hand, I think that IF they would add MORE undressing (especially FULL undressing, not just from underwear), they will become MUCH MUCH better. |
|
02-12-10 11:41pm
Replies (4)
|
Review
29
|
Bubble Butt Orgy
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ orgy as advertised
+ all-black action as advertised (black guys, black girls)
+ plenty of action, including anal and occasional DP
++ real emotions (or a very good imitation)
+ initial conversation adds an additional twist
+ decent quality pictures
+- decent lighting and cameraguy work (at least compared to previously reviewed FilthFreaks sites) |
| Cons: |
- girls are not models, some are ugly
-- only 400x300 clips
-- PRE_CHECKED cross-sales when purchasing
- cross-sales within member area
- technical problems with the site
- no ZIPped downloads
-- supposedly no updates |
| Bottom Line: |
After disappointment with first two sites of FilthFreaks network (see my reviews of BlackGangWhiteBang and ALuckyStranger), I didn't really expect much from BubbleButtOrgy, and I shall say that I was pleasantly surprised with it.
The site is about several black girls (4 to 6) and several black guys (about the same number) having fun together. Girls are not models, and some are ugly, but on the plus side they seem to have fun (unlike girls in BlackGangWhiteBang). Every episode starts with some conversation and/or girls showing their assets (usually assets are substantial), and then it moves towards the all-out orgy, which usually includes some anal, and sometimes includes DP.
Site has about 22 episodes, each consisting of 12-20 clips 5 minutes each. This is where lack of ZIP-ped downloads kicks in, as downloading 20 clips one by one is not fun. Unlike BlackGangWhiteBang and ALuckyStranger, pictures are not screencaps, but are from separate photoshoot, and are of decent size (varies, but can be as much as 2900 width). Updates are not dated and most likely are absent. As with the other FilthFreaks sites, I've experienced a few "Cannot find server" errors.
Bottom line: not bad content, provided that you're not scared by mediocre girls (who on the plus side can have fun on camera). Unfortunately, lack of updates and minor glitches here and there make this site not so interesting, but if FilthFreaks have more sites of similar quality (and NOT like BlackGangWhiteBang and ALuckyStranger), the network might be worth the price (again, if you're not scared away by mediocre girls). |
|
04-09-09 11:42pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
30
|
3D Sex Games
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
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. |
|
10-09-08 02:26pm
Replies (12)
|
Review
31
|
Naked News
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
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. |
|
10-06-08 07:56am
Replies (2)
|
Review
32
|
Active Dolls
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
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. |
|
09-28-08 05:46am
Replies (0)
|
Review
33
|
Mega Penetrations
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ "mega penetrations" as advertised
+ hardcore action in addition to "mega penetrations" (often up to DP, sometimes DPP)
+ reasonable variety (different toys and setups)
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- sometimes action is disgusting
- girls aren't really cute (expected for this kind of content)
- probably infrequent updates (just as with other sites of this network)
- pics are just screenshots (quite blurry 640x480)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
Here comes yet another review of yet another Jerk-Off Pass site. While it isn't exactly my cup of tea, I'll still try to review.
Unlike most of the other sites of this network, there is not much plot in videos. Still, there are indeed "mega penetrations" as advertised, plus lots of hardcore action in each episode (often up to DP, sometimes even with DPP). Variety is here, but sometimes this site crosses the line going into things I consider outright disgusting (sorry guys, but eating stuff which sticks out of girl's ass isn't really my cup of tea; fortunately, it is just an occasional twist rather than typical for the site).
There are about 30 episodes on the site, each is 20-30 min video. Cameraguy work is decent, but video encoding quality is typical for this network and is "very average" (not really clear 1.2MBit/s 640x480 WMV).
Pics on this site are just 640x480 screenshots, so pics lovers don't need to bother.
As with the other sites of this network, updates aren't expected to be too frequent (see other my reviews of Jerk-Off Pass sites).
Bottom line:
For big dildo lovers, who don't care about pics, it should be a very good site. For others who aren't that much into this kind of things but (like me) can take an occasional look - can be a valuable addition to the Jerk-Off Pass network. |
|
01-18-08 12:37pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
34
|
Blacks on Blondes
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ black guys and blondes, as advertised :-)
+ guys have impressive dicks too
+ huge amount of content
+ decent video quality (though, guys, with 1500kBit/s you can do better than 640x480) |
| Cons: |
- swindling attempt (see my comment)
- recent videos have strong 'seen one of them - seen them all' subjective feeling
- models are not exactly gorgeous
- very inconvenient navigation
- no way to see what the video is about without going to pictures (which is a separate section) or home page
- cameraguy work and lighting could be better
- $35/mon price is above average |
| Bottom Line: |
After escaping (as I hope) swindling attempt described in my earlier comment, I signed in with Blacks on Blondes.
At first, I was surprised how inconvenient their navigation is; to see what video is about before downloading I needed to go both to pictures section and home page, and look for the same clip pictures and description.
Second impression was that video quality is not bad, though cameraguy work and lighting could be improved; models aren't exactly top models but mostly are ok.
The third impression was that 'seen one of them - seen them all', which is especially true for the recent clips. After reading positive reviews here on PU I've tried a few clips from the middle, and I should agree with other reviewers that earlier videos were indeed more interesting.
And that was the fourth and final impression of the site: they do have a huge collection, but recently started to move down the hill.
Bottom line: if you're into black guys with big dicks on white girls, and you don't mind high price, it can easily be the site for you. |
|
10-28-07 03:17pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
35
|
Dare Ring
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ unique idea (kind of Strip Truth or Dare);
+ players seem to play for real;
+ players seem to have lots of fun;
+ models are of 'girl-next-door' kind, but quite good;
+ decent quality videos;
+ non-recurring subscription;
+ webboard which is still active (despite lack of updates, see 'cons' below); |
| Cons: |
- no more updates;
- game rules are not posted;
- very few guys, some games are girl-only;
- pretty slow and mild action;
- no stills;
- cameraguy work could be better;
- interlacing is visible (hate it); |
| Bottom Line: |
Another "real reality" (= "no scripting") site; does seem genuine play without action being scripted. In short - it's kind of StripGameCentral (see my review of it), but with videos and at least some action. Unfortunately, not updated anymore, which is on the other hand compensated by non-recurring subscription though, so it's a kind of fair deal - pay once and get all they've got to date.
What you get for your money is 12 games, each about 2 hours length, video only. Videos are quite good in quality (640x480x1300kBit/s), though I hate interlacing being visible. Each game starts with players fully dressed and taking random cards to perform, with answering sex questions, undressing and kissing. It becomes more and more hot with time, but in the end it doesn't go further than oral action :-(.
Also I should note that it becomes quite boring after viewing a few games - the same game, about the same questions and dares; bonus games (like "naked twister" and "blowjob roulette" somewhat help it though.
Overall, it looks as a pretty good implementation of an interesting idea, and it's a pity that site owner didn't go with it further; I feel that there is a lot of room for improvement and if some more efforts, it could become a wonderful site.
Bottom line: if you do like pretty mild action and girls undressing, and/or you do like non-scripted site, it can easily be worth a look at one-time non-recurring $19.95. |
|
10-26-07 08:30am
Replies (0)
|
Review
36
|
Totally Undressed
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+++ original concept
+++ very natural feeling
++ probably unscripted
++ mostly beautiful girls
+ HD video quality (1280x720) |
| Cons: |
--- no translation, no subtitles
- collection is small
- price (29.95) is inadequate for such small collection |
| Bottom Line: |
TotallyUndressed is a new site which has great potential which is unfortunately not realized because of one small but very important detail, if they fix it (and will produce regular updates) - for me it will become one of personal favorites.
The plot in every clip (about 20-25 minutes each) is very similar: there is a room where girls are coming to some kind of interview (maybe job interview), where they're asked some questions, then they are asked to remove shoes (to measure height, though I don't know it is related to interview), then - shirt and so on, and pretty soon they come to suck a dildo and get dildo-fucked. There is nothing unusual about this plot, but what makes it really special is how natural it feels. Girls do not look as models, they do not look as pros at all, they're shy (or playing being shy), and so on. The whole thing looks so natural that I just need to hope that it is not a REAL job interview where girls are tricked into doing this kind of things without knowing it will be all over the Internet.
Now to the bad part. As I've said, this thing looks and feels very natural, and there is a lot of conversation going on. The problem is that all this conversation goes in some language I cannot comprehend (probably Russian or something similar), and it spoils at least half of the fun.
GUYS, IF YOU ARE READING THIS - MAKE SOME EFFORT TO ADD SUBTITLES TO YOUR MOVIES (for example, the same way as FuckingGamble guys are doing it), IT WILL BECOME SO MUCH BETTER!
Technical details: video quality is nothing special but ok (1280x720 ~2Mbit/s), number of scenes is small (~15), which is IMHO ok for a new site, but price (29.95) is certainly way too steep for this amount of content.
Other details: there is NO B/G or G/G sex on TotallyUndressed, girls are just masturbating and playing with dildos. Girls are of "girl next door" type, but on more beautiful side. The plot is almost exactly the same every time, it is reaction of the girls which makes it worth looking.
Bottom line: it might be a VERY GOOD (I'd probably rate it in 90's range) if they just would add subtitles (or any other kind of translation). Unlike most adult sites, dialogs is a VERY important part of TotallyUndressed, and being kept in dark about what girls and interviewers have said, ruins most of the fun. |
|
04-15-11 03:50am
Replies (10)
|
Review
37
|
Nude Fight Club
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
++ beautiful girls
++ most likely unscripted fight
+ progressive undressing
++ very good video quality (up to Full HD 1920x1080)
++ access to 21sextury network
+ many billing options
+ no pre-checked cross-sales |
| Cons: |
--- pretty much pointless, girls do not know what they're really doing
-- no real rules, no winner or loser |
| Bottom Line: |
When reviewing such a site, it is very difficult to avoid comparing it all the time with UltimateSurrender (which is BTW at the very top of my personal ratings). All the time I was a bit confused: if comparing NudeFightClub to UltimateSurrender, it IMHO doesn't stand a chance, but if comparing it to "average site out there" it isn't too bad.
First of all, NudeFightClub clearly loses to UltimateSurrender in the overall concept. It looks that the authors of NudeFightClub got the main idea of "show how girls fight and then fuck", but didn't make it look anywhere real. Unlike UltimateSurrender, on NudeFightClub there are no rules, no judge, and no real competition. It just shows two girls wandering around the ring and hitting each other without apparent reason. Probably "fight" is not scripted, but as there is no real reasons for girls to fight, it is not really competitive. The "fight" starts with girls dressed, and they undress as the action goes, and in the end girls are usually completely nude. There is no judge, and no score, so in the end, there is no winner or loser, girls just move from nude fighting into some lesbian action.
On the positive side, girls in NudeFightClub are usually very beautiful, so watching them is a pleasure. Video quality is one of the best in the industry (up to 8MBit/s 1920x1080, both in WMV and MP4). Download speeds are good. And last but not least - it provides access to 21Sextury network (and IMHO there are much better sites within 21Sextury than this one).
Bottom line: if you like UltimateSurrender because it is real and competitive - probably you shouldn't bother with NudeFightClub, you're likely to be very disappointed. But if all you want is nude girls wandering around in some sport-like action - it might be worth a try, especially considering bonus access to 21Sextury network. |
|
04-13-11 08:43am
Replies (1)
|
Review
38
|
Brazzers
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
++ surprisingly good "script play" by porn models
++ very good lighting
++ very good cameraguy work
++ very good locations
+ big network
+ reasonable variety even without single site
+ good SD video quality
+ frequent updates |
| Cons: |
----- Outright cheating about HD right from the home page
--- pre-checked cross-sales
- somewhat overgrown recent SD video files (2.3Mbit/s for 768x432). |
| Bottom Line: |
I would like to say that Brazzers could be one of the networks to wish for as a Christmas present :-), if not for what I consider CHEATING their own users :-(.
On the surface they look as just one of the many networks (most of which are poor-quality and boooring), but if going inside, it seems that Brazzers do everything (except for ONE thing) just a bit better, and it makes a BIG difference.
Video quality is VISIBLY better then usual, models are a BIT better then usual, locations and lighting/cameraguy work are EXCELLENT. They even managed to add some variety to their sites, and make models play scripts in quite believable way. From technical point of view, while I don't think that 2.3MBit/s is what really required for their recent 768x432 videos, but IMHO there is nothing TOO bad about it.
Overall, quality is excellent, amount of material is enormous, updates are frequent, and there is some additional twist is added by locations and scripts. What else could you can wish for? Just one thing - that they would not CHEAT on their own users. And when you click on their home page a big sign which says "Join now and embrace the future with the best HD experience", you get to "Join" page with prices, pay, and only THEN figure out that HD they've promised you pon home page is EXTRA which you need to PAY FOR (so-called "Brazzers Credits"). The more I think about it, the more it looks as CHEATING for me.
As a result, while their productions team is second to none, and I would like to put a 90 mark for them, I feel compelled to deduct 5 points for PRE-CHECKED cross-sales, and another 10 - for this CHEATING with HD, so it makes 75 now.
IF they will at least TELL UPFRONT that HD is EXTRA, I would still rant how bad this practice is, but at least it will be fair warning for the users, and I will be happy to remove those deductions I've mentioned above.
P.S. What I would wish for a Christmas present: if Brazzers would keep their excellent production team but will fire their over-aggressive sales team; BTW, I think it would be helpful for the site in the long run, because CHEATING YOUR OWN USERS doesn't usually work long. |
|
11-12-09 11:02pm
Replies (5)
|
Review
39
|
VideosZ
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
++ huge selection of DVDs
++ rather good quality
+ search feature with both keywords and categories
+ "DVD Collection" and "Scene Collection" features
+ frequent updates (though with this number of DVDs already existing I don't really care) |
| Cons: |
--- pre-checked cross-sales
-- with a few exceptions, same old, same old.
- no WMV format
- categories are quite limited and mostly about action types (Oral, Anal, DP and so on)
- no option to download whole DVD at once |
| Bottom Line: |
I've tried VideosZ as a typical DVD video site, and it is indeed such a site. For somebody didn't try such sites before, I would describe it as a huuuuge adult video store with your regular DVDs on the shelves, with the only (though very important) difference being that all those DVDs are virtual and are essentially free (as long as you're paying for your monthly membership).
As in your usual "adult video store", DVD selection can be rather large, but unfortunately it's essentially the same old thing, with 99% being very similar, all shoot in cheap motel, with little or no attention to lighting or cameraguy work, with the only difference being what kind of actions you can find inside, but even the different actions are very limited and cannot keep attention for a long time. If actions on the milder side, you usually get better girls, if actions are on wilder side, you usually get worse girls, down to outright ugly ones. Overall, IMHO this whole site is very good in showing the crisis of the adult industry in general, and IMHO this crisis is not because of sites like PornTube or financial meltdown, but because of lack of creativity of those guys who're making DVDs and adult sites. Sure, there are a few notable exceptions, like Private DVDs (though even Private doesn't look too good on VideosZ, not sure if it's just poor selection there, or Private has also went downhill recently) and kink.com web sites, but in general it looks that this whole industry is in the midst of a big creativity crisis.
Back to VideosZ review. As I've said, as a "syndication" site it merely reflects rather sad state of the whole industry. For me it felt rather boring.
Technically site is not bad, with a rather decent search feature (though it would be better to have categories not only on action types, like "Double Blowjob", but also on type of setting). "DVD Collection" and "Scene Collection" are convenient additions. What annoyed me was VideosZ's selection of video formats. In Windows-dominated world I personally consider forcing me to install DivX as an insult, and I'm not crazy about MP4 on Windows PC too; gimme WMV, and I welcome the rest as nice extras, but lack of WMV creates an additional hassle for me which I don't like.
Bottom line: VideosZ a very good example of a "typical DVD site", with the biggest problem being lack of creativity by DVD publishers. The rest is quite ok, and if you're not bored from "same old, same old" stuff, it might be worth a try. I would rate VideosZ at decent 80, but I feel obligated to penalize it for pre-checked cross-sales, so overall score goes down to 75. |
|
05-19-09 12:44am
Replies (6)
|
Review
40
|
Small Tits Hunter
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ young chicks in hardcore action
+ chicks are cute
+ video quality is better than average
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- not much content
- somewhat boring
- only vidcaps as pics
- most likely not many updates (as with other sites of the same network)
- could be just fragments from movies (so it's not exclusive) - see comments/reviews for DirtyBabysitters
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
Here goes yet another review of Jerk-Off Pass network site. SmallTitsHunter is a newer addition to this network and quite a decent one I should add.
Theme of the site is about young-looking girls, who usually indeed have quite small tits :-). As site is new, there are only 10-15 episodes. As usual for the Jerk-Off Pass sites, clips are 20-30 min length, all within advertised theme. Cameraguy work and lighting are way above average, which is somewhat negated by typical for this netork "very average" encoding. Cameraguy work is so good that it raises question if it is just scenes from movies (see pat362's comment on DirtyBabysitters site of the same network). As with other sites of the same network, you shouldn't expect too many updates. On this site pics are vidcaps only.
Bottom line: this site is hardly worth it's price primarily due to very small amount of content and expected infrequent updates (though content quality is pretty good), but as a part of Jerk-Off Pass network with 27 other sites it can be worth a try. |
|
01-07-08 03:47am
Replies (0)
|
Review
41
|
White Box Black Cocks
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ black guys on white chicks
+ chicks are hot, dicks are black and big
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- most likely won't be updated (see reviews for other sites of the network, like GanglandVictims).
- very little content
- booooring - always one guy and one girl (without anal)
- pics are just screenshots (quite blurry 640x480)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
One more site of JerkOff Pass network, and once again it shares things like login, navigation and video quality with other sites of the same network, like GangLandVictims. This site is a new kid on the block, so it's difficult to tell how often it will be updated, but given history of the other sites of the network (see reviews), most likely it won't be updated often or won't be updated at all.
The main difference with the other sites is obviously content; here I should say that while action is quite repetitive (how many different things can you do in one guy-one girl combination without anal?), it is compensated a lot by quality of the girls: they generally look quite good and it looks that they really enjoy themselves too.
There are about 15 episodes on site, each is about 30 min video, and all within theme. As with other JerkOffPass sites, main attraction is video (pics are vidcaps of quite low quality/resolution). Variety of actions isn't so good, but as I've said above it's pretty much compensated by girls looks and enthusiasm. And as with the other JerkOffPass sites, overall video quality is very average.
Bottom line: not that bad content overall, but with that little content and with unlikely updates isn't worth it as a separate site. As a part of the big network is definitely worth a look (especially if you've already joined because of some other site :-)). All in all, not a bad addition to the network. |
|
12-18-07 04:20pm
Replies (7)
|
Review
42
|
Gangland Victims
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ black guys on white chicks
+ group action
+ DP, DPP, probably even DAP - you name it
+ despite "victims" in site name, not much pretended abuse
+ reasonable variety for this kind of site
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- not updated (TBP lists 35+ episodes back in 2005, now it's 40)
- plot is unbeleivable (but still fun)
- pics are just screenshots (quite blurry 640x480)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
GangLandVictims is a member of Jerk-Off pass network with 28 sites (including 2 sites currently unlisted by TBP).
It is an interracial site (well-hung black guys on white girls) with a twist: their plot is "one wrong turn and you get gangbanged", with girls supposedly getting lost in black neighborhood and getting banged by a bunch of black guys. Sure it's unbelievable, but the way it is done is surprisingly funny. Girls seem to enjoy scenes, and there is little pretended abuse (despite site name and plot).
There are about 40 episodes on site, each is about 30 min video. Main attraction is video (pics are vidcaps of quite low quality/resolution). All episodes are within theme, and there are tons of anal and DP (almost every episode has DP). Variety is pretty good for this kind of site: not only all positions and twists are tried (including DPP and I think DAP), but also setups are quite different. Cameraguy work and lighting are very average, and so is quality of compression: videos are 640x480 with 1.2MBit/s stream, and quality isn't too good for this high bandwidth; in short - very average site from video quality standpoint.
Bottom line: reasonable site for interracial/group/DP video fans; 1 month membership to grab all you like can be worth it, especially considering network access. Pics should be looked for elsewhere though. |
|
12-15-07 08:35am
Replies (0)
|
Review
43
|
Three Pillows
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- seems to be run by the people who're bisexuals themselves
- pretty good variety of actions
- quite good models
- lots of relevant extras ("bi position of the week", bi cartoons etc.), making it kind of 'portal'
- seem to organize some shoots themselves with members comments (what members want to see) taken into account |
| Cons: |
- video quality
- video quality
- video quality
- did I already say "video quality?" :-)
- most videos are in other-than-English languages w/o subtitles (not that it matters that much though for this kind of content)
- site design is quite poor |
| Bottom Line: |
The site is quite interesting as it looks not exactly usual porn site with adult content only, but more as a portal for bisexual (mostly MMF) people.
Most of the content is exclusive, but not shoot by them themselves or according to their guidelines; lots of content is bought from now defunct bi sites (they say it openly). This old content is usually horrible in video (and sometimes cameraguy work) quality. Sometimes they shoot it themselves, but (unfortunately) not too often.
Bottom line: if you're into MMF bi sex, you should definitely try it (despite all the shortcomings, other bi sites seem to be even worse), if not - still can be good if you're bored of the same patterns and are not afraid to become bi just because of looking at MMF sex :-); beware of video quality though (very low by today standards, but in this niche there might not be that much choice). |
|
10-20-07 02:53pm
Replies (1)
|
Review
44
|
Newbie Nudes
(0)
73.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ free membership
+ premium membership is non-recurring
+ lots of new pictures daily
+ "nudles": ability to get premium membership for "free" (for clicks that lead to their site)
+ rating system which does work
+ profiles
+ community-oriented features (blogs, chat, forum) |
| Cons: |
- upsells of premium membership (including pop-ups, yuck!)
- upsells of all other things EVERYEHERE
- premium membership at $27.95 is way too expensive for the content that costs site owners nothing
- quality of pictures is way too amateurish even for amateur site
- no scenarios, just single pictures
- content is rather repetitive |
| Bottom Line: |
After all deliberations (see comments to IDoctor's review) I've decided to take a look myself to provide not that biased review.
First of all, quality of pictures is way too amateurish even for free amateur-submitted stuff (TBP reviews say "quality varies" - come on, quality just plain sucks; what kind of picture quality can you expect if a girl shoots herself in a mirror in her bathroom?).
As for the content of the pictures - some pictures are outright ugly, some of better ones are obviously stolen from paysites (come on, girl won't do DP with this kind of professional lighting in private life), and it leaves us with not that much decent ones. Fortunately, rating system seems to really work and those pictures that make it up to the top, are of better content (no dicks), but quality still sucks.
So (as messmer have already said in his comment) it doesn't make ANY sense to go there for pictures. On the other hand, as a COMMUNITY site it's not bad at all. Community is large, active, site provides most of the features needed for such a community.
Bottom line: if you're looking for pictures and you're NOT into amateur pictures of real girls (with profiles) of dubious quality, STAY AWAY. On the other hand, if you're looking for a community of exhibitionists - it's not a bad choice. As a result of this dual nature, I've had trouble with putting single rating for the site, so I've decided to rate it as 60 for pictures and as 85 for community, and take average. |
|
11-24-07 03:38am
Replies (4)
|
Review
45
|
Lost Bets Games
(0)
72.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Updated: |
02-02-10 05:03am (Update History)
Reason: Rating has been changed based on Capn's report that content is not exclusive, but re-used old content from Clips4Sale
|
| Pros: |
++ original idea
++ supposedly unscripted action
++ variety of games
+ girls seem to have fun
+ frequent updates
+ no pre-checked cross-sales (YMMV) |
| Cons: |
-- girls are often on ugly side
-- video quality is poor for year 2010
- action is very soft (almost "strip-only")
- games are indoor-only
- no stills |
| Bottom Line: |
As a big fan of sex games, I am really happy to find various sites with the same idea popping up recently. In addition to LostBetsGames, launched in Oct'09, there is SpicyRoulette, launched in Dec'09 (see my review a month ago), and FuckingGamble, launched in Jan'10 (stay tuned for my review upcoming in few days).
LostBetsGames is yet another site, similar in spirit to DareRing (now not updated anymore for a REALLY long while) and to StripGameCentral. It looks as it is about real people gathering and playing real strip games. I LIKE this idea (unscripted amateur action), I like it a LOT, the thing I do NOT like is amateurish implementation of this idea. I can understand that it will be "girl next door", not a pornstar, but LostBetGames IMHO went too far, often crossing the line between "girl next door" and "outright ugly girl". Videos are shot and processed in obviously amateurish style (lighting, cameraguy work, and color balance being almost nonexistent). And about encoding - come on, I do NOT think that in year 2010 320x240 qualifies as "medium quality", and that 640x480 qualifies as "HD". And on LostBetsGames, 320x240 is the MOST you can get for WMV, and 640x480 - the MOST you can get for MP4.
If they could overcome their technical shortcomings, it would be a VERY good site, mostly because of (at least mostly) unscripted nature and girls having real fun playing. And they update once a week, with every update being a single game from 5 to 15 minutes.
Bottom line: While LostBetsGames back in Oct'09 probably was a VERY interesting thing, now, with arrival of SpicyRoulette and FuckingGamble, I think they need to add more professionalism to become really competitive. Real girls having fun is great, but decent video quality (including cameraguy work, lighting and encoding) should also be there. On the other hand, if REAL strip poker is your thing, it easily can be worth a look.
UPDATE: based on Capn's report that content is not exclusive, but re-used old content from Clips4Sale (which also explains why looks so out-of-date), rating has been dropped by 10 points. |
|
02-01-10 03:34am
Replies (7)
|
Review
46
|
Lady Sonia
(0)
72.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Seems to enjoy herself for real
+ Very good collection of various fetishes
+ Fetishes are combined with sex
+ Tons of material
+ Decent video quality
+ "Lady Sonia Personal Journal" |
| Cons: |
- Very few models (something like 2 guys + 3 or 4 girls in recent videos)
- Lady Sonia herself is well past her 20th and even 30th; looks more like her 50th or 60th.
- Somewhat repetitive
- Poor site navigation
- Stills are screenshots only and are outright poor
- Cameraguy work can be better
- Rather high price |
| Bottom Line: |
Lady Sonia positions herself as 'Masturbatrix' rather than 'Dominatrix', and this is very true. I will go even as far as stating that this site is mislabeled and 'Femdom' is inappropriate label for this site; there various different fetishes represented on the site, but Femdom as this term is commonly used is not one of them: there is no CBT or spanking or anything else like that on this site (not that I really insist on having it, just think that potential users should be made aware what's inside), the most hard femdom you'll see are tease and denial games. There are several other fetishes covered (from pantyhose to fucking machines) though, with a decent amount of sex thrown in.
It seems that the models enjoy it for real, with very good collection of different fetishes covered by herself and by other girls.
On the negative side, there are very few models featured on the site, which leads to lots of repetitions. Also most of the models are not exactly gorgeous.
Video quality is decent (recent ones are 800x450x2600kBit/s), though it is upset by rather poor lighting and cameraguy work, which IMO makes such good encoding quality a waste of bandwidth; fortunately, there is alternative download provided (284x216x500kBit/s).
Bottom line: if you're into fetishes (like pantyhose), combined with sex - it can be your site despite rather high price. But for those who looks for hardcore FemDom with whips, chains and CBT - don't bother, it's just not here. |
|
10-30-07 03:49am
Replies (4)
|
Review
47
|
Flash for Adults
(0)
70.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ surprisingly funny
+ surprisingly entertaining
+ no outright "glitches"
+ interactive Flash clips
+ nostalgic games like arcanoid and pacman (don't confuse with Pokemon). |
| Cons: |
--- non-exclusive content
-- pre-checked cross-sales
-- interactivity of clips is limited
-- erotics is not always properly integrated into games |
| Bottom Line: |
Recently I've joined RussianTeensClub, but was severely disappointed (see my review). The more reason I had to try the other sites included into the same membership. One of them was FlashForAdults.
Originally (especially given disappointment about RussianTeensClub) I've expected FlashForAdults to be a completely useless garbage, but it was substantially better then that.
I've spent some time trying to understand why I feel not so bad about this site, and I think I've found the reason. While the content is not exclusive (a HUGE minus as such), and there isn't that much content that you can find on some free adult flash sites, content quality is quite consistent (at least better than on free sites).
On free flash sites (at least those which I've had a misfortune to run into) amount of content is usually huge, but unfortunately 90% is complete b/s, and it takes a while to find something decent. FlashForAdults IMHO provides more balanced feeling, with most of stuff which one can look at without disgust. Content consists of clips, interactive clips and games. Most of the clips could be more interactive, most of the games could have better integrated erotics element, but overall it was surprisingly entertaining.
Bottom line: while such a non-exclusive site IMHO can't stand on it's own, I was pleasantly surprised with the selection and quality of the implementation of the games and clips, and would rate it as a "75" (which is not bad for non-exclusive site), but needed to deduct 5 points for pre-checked cross-sales, making it 70. |
|
06-23-09 06:31am
Replies (0)
|
Review
48
|
3D Stripper
(0)
70.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
++ virtual 3D stripper as advertised
++ movements are surprisingly natural
++ clothing "fits" the girl surprisingly naturally
+ different outfits
+ several dozens of movements
+ "queue" of movements to make continuous dance
+ "stripper time" to keep "game" feeling |
| Cons: |
--- only one girl
-- removing clothes is not animated
- sometimes there are "jumps" between different segments
- somewhat confusing interface
-- no site value except for the game
- complicated game activation procedure |
| Bottom Line: |
This site proposes subscription, but obviously it's not about subscription at all. It is just selling of the downloadable 3D game, that's it. Site "extras" in addition to the game itself include only a few 3D toons and several "same old" video feeds of dubious quality.
Now about the game.
The good. On the first glance it is surprisingly entertaining. After getting through download and all the registrations and activations, you can see a girl which dances some random dance, and you can tell her what to do next. Actions are placed into the "queue" so you can make long dance sequence. You can change girl outfit, or ask her to remove some or all clothing. To keep things more interesting, there is "stripper time" which requires some attention (not too bad to distract from the girl). Girl movements are surprisingly natural (obviously somehow scanned from some real dancing girl), and clothes fit her naturally too. There are a few dozens of different movements, and 4 or 5 different outfits (each consisting of 4 items, and each item can be taken off separately).
The bad. On the second glance, it starts to become boring. There is only ONE girl, and number of outfits and movements, while pretty big, still starts to become boring in an hour or so. When the girls takes something off, it is not animated (item just fades away) and it doesn't help too.
The ugly. There some minor but annoying things with the site and game: my login wasn't activated until a few hour after paying, activation procedure was complicated and confusing, and UI isn't too obvious. But these issues were quite minor and don't affect bottom line much.
Bottom line: while there is definitely NO value in recurring subscription, one-time "subscription" (to purchase the game @19.95) MIGHT make some sense if you're turned on by the girls merely stripping. While usually I don't include pricing into consideration, in this case I can't help but to say that value for money isn't good here. If the site would throw in more girls/outfits/movements (or at least include their 3D Girls), I would rate them higher. |
|
09-23-08 05:49am
Replies (3)
|
Review
49
|
School Bus Chicks
(0)
70.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ young chicks in hardcore action
+ chicks are cute
+ plot is fun
+ video quality is better than average
+ creativity (different setups and combinations)
+ both screenshots and real pics
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- IMHO it crosses the thin line between "implying sex with legal teens" and "implying sex with underage teens"
- most likely not many updates (as with other sites of the same network)
- could be just fragments from movies (so it's not exclusive) - see comments/reviews for DirtyBabysitters
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
This site belongs to the same JerkOff Pass network as DirtyBabysitters and shares a lot of features (not content) with that site (also shares some features with the other sites of the network, but DirtyBabysitters is definitely the closest thing).
Overall, SchoolBusChicks would be about on par with DirtyBabysitters, but there is one thing that annoys me about site's content: IMHO it crosses the thin line between "pretending to show legal teens" and "pretending to show underage teens". I'm quite sure all the models are above 18, but for me even pretending to show underage teens having sex isn't a good thing. That's the reason why Dirtybabysitters got much better rating than SchoolBusChicks (while I can easily imagine college girl doing babysitting, schoolgirls having sex are off-limits for me).
There are 20+ episodes there (each is 20-30 min video), and all seem to be within "schoolbus" theme (with appropriate plot and dialogs). Girls are cute, action is hot, cameraguy work is very good too. Video encoding is typical for the JerkOffPass network (which means "very average").
Bottom line: would be a good site for those who're comfortable with "schoolgirl sex" theme, but I'm not so ok with it. The rest of the network can make it worth the money even without this site. |
|
12-31-07 10:40am
Replies (0)
|
Review
50
|
Virtual Fem
(0)
68.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
++ unique concept
+ original use of AI (Artificial Intelligence) technologies
+ regular updates
+ improving over time |
| Cons: |
-- poor overall implementation
-- poor AI logic, especially with earlier models
-- quite poor conversation (I remember chat bots capable of MUCH more intelligent conversation)
-- video quality of 320x240 MPEG is inadequate for 2010
- need to download the game first, and then need to download upgrade right away |
| Bottom Line: |
After reviewing FuckingGamble, 'Capn' has referred me to VirtualFem. Thanks for referral, Capn, it indeed was quite an interesting experience, though a good idea behind this site has IMHO suffered a LOT because of poor implementation.
VirtualFem is not really just a usual adult site with video clips to be downloaded and played in Media Player, but they require their own download, more like sites like 3DSexGames or PlaySexGame. When downloading for the first time, you get version 2.0 and only one girl, and it was a HUGE disappointment for me. Fortunately, after an upgrade to v3.0 (upgrade is available right near original download - guys, why don't you make SINGLE download for v3.0 to avoid disappointment?) and also downloading one of newer girls things became more interesting.
What you get at that point is a girl, which you
can chat with. It is not a 3D girl, but a series of pre-shot video clips, which are affected by your chat. Earlier girls are very straightforward (which was boring for me - what is the fun if you can tell the girl "fuck ass" right away and she gets fucked up the ass?). Newer girls are more sophisticated, and sometimes are even interesting to deal with. Still, quality of conversation is IMHO poor (I remember chat bots capable of MUCH more intelligent conversation). Another problem is video quality - come on, today is 2010, and 320x240 qualifies as "barely acceptable" even in my books (and this 320x240 is represented by 2MBit/s MPEG - not MP4 or WMV - stream, so downloads are HUGE despite poor quality).
Overall, the feeling of the site was quite mixed: idea of using AI-driven girls is good, but IMHO poor AI logic and poor videos hurt this site a lot. On the plus side, I need to mention that the site is updated on regular basis (new girls are added) and that logic is improved over time too (difference between older girls and newer girls is VERY big).
Bottom line: while there is a chance of this site to become one of those I would like to visit on regular basis, right now I can recommend it only to those who likes this idea (controlling real girl via chat) that much that he can ignore all the drawbacks. IMHO rating of 68 ("Needs Work", but close to "Average") is quite descriptive for the current state of the site. |
|
02-08-10 05:44am
Replies (1)
|
|
