Full Porn Network (0)
|
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-PU lists the membership price at $59.95/month, with a PU discount of $39.99/month recurring.
Or a 1 year membership for $119.88.
I found a holiday discount of $59.95 for the first year. So if you want to join the network, or one of its sites, I suggest waiting for a holiday discount, since it's so much cheaper.
-Unlimited streaming and downloading.
-The network includes about 20 different sites. The most famous one is JamesDeen.com, because James Deen has made a name for himself as a porn star.
-There is a large amount of hardcore videos at the network. Some videos available in 4K, most are available in 1080p and lower definitions.
-Content is exclusive.
-If cookies are enabled, you don't have to enter your login details, you are automatically entered into the site once you click on the "login" link.
-Login and member pages are secure (https).
-Easy to use slide-show program for viewing photosets.
-Photosets have 2 choices of definition for a zip file: 1024p and 1600p. |
| Cons: |
PROS(CONTINUED):
-Photoset default filename includes the model's name, title of the set, and file definition.
CONS(START OF):
-Pre-checked cross-sale on join page. Standard for porn sites.
-Sometimes your login details fail to work. You have to try to get new login details, or play around with your old login details hoping it will get you into the network.
-Rocketgate is the default biller. I think CCBill or Famesupport are easier to deal with.
-I don't believe I got a confirming email on my membership. Which creates problems. Especially if the site does not recognize your login details. Rocketgate, the default biller, does not seem very responsive about confirming your membership, even though they were the biller I used to join, and I sent them my name, email address, the last four digits of my credit card I used to join, and the amount and date of my join.
-The photosets are shot by a professional photographer: so the photos are real photos and not screencaps. |
| Bottom Line: |
CONS(CONTINUED):
The photos are well lit. But the photos fail to emphasize the physical beauty of the models (even when some of the models are naturally attractive). Riley Reid is attractive, but her photosets present her as a plain-looking girl. Chloe Cherry comes across a litte better. Chloe can be a fine-looking model, but I don't want to save any of her photosets: I want a model to be attractive, or seductive, or somebody I can fantasize about fucking. But the photosets of Chloe are not appealing. I'd rather look at photos of the meat hanging in a butcher's shop, which, while not sexual, can be interesting because I know the meat can be transformed into a delicious meal. Looking at Chloe's photos, I get turned off by her skin tones, by how un-attractive she appears.
And that's for the good looking models, who are in the minority of models.
The majority of the site models are plain to unattractive.
BOTTOM LINE(START OF):
The network gives you access to about 20 different porn sites. The most famous site is JamesDeen.com, because he's made a name for himself as a porn star. There's some controvery about James Deen: he's been accused of abuse by some of his sex partners. Deen claims he's innocent and can't understand why women would complain about his rough treatment of them during sex. He's just a simple, innocent guy who enjoys slapping women, spitting on them, twisting their arms to make them moan, and showing sluts that he's the master who controls these cunts with his powerful cock. And he smiles a lot, which shows he's just a good old boy from Pasadena, California.
The network features rough sex. A lot of anal sex. The models are usually called sluts, and treated as pieces of meat. Women are to be used and abused, because men are dominant creatures.
The models are sluts: So you get lots of tattoos and implants.
Even the cute models come across as trailer trash whores.
I enjoy softcore and hardcore. But this network doesn't appeal to me. Rocco Siffredi and Devils Film, two competing sites, are much more interesting and enjoyable. For one thing, Rocco Siffredi and Devils Film features more attractive models. Some of the sex scenes at Rocco and Devils Film can be intriguing. And hot.
Whereas the full porn network scenes focus on rough sex, anal sex, treating the women like pieces of meat.
There is a channel called "Sex Games". It appears to be an adult animation channel, where you can play with cartoon figures and fap (masturbate).
Edit: My mistake. The "Sex Games" link, although placed at the top of the page as a normal channel, is actually a separate site, and not part of the Full Porn Network.
The reason I'm leaving it in this review is the "Sex Games" site appears to be very impressive.
A lot of thought and skilled technical knowledge went into making the site.
Joining that site is free.
I recommend checking it out.
Although free porn sites are not reviewed at the PU site, the free site seems intriguing.
dirtyfapgame.com is the sex game site I have mentioned.
I wish there were more hours in a day, because the questions they ask of your thoughts and desires, and the quality of the cartoon images, is just amazing at dirtyfapgame. I haven't joined the site yet, but I hope to join soon.
Getting back to Full Porn Network:
This is personal taste, but the vibe of the network does not appeal to me:
I want young girls who look attractive, and seem to enjoy sex.
The theme of the network is rough sex, anal sex, treating girls and women as sluts who should be abused, because men are dominant creatures, and girls are happiest when you spit on them, force them into painful and uncomfortable positions, slap them around, all in the nature of treating women as they secretly desire.
So if you fantasize about rough sex, anal sex, then the network might be appealing.
Especially if you can get a holiday special for around $60 for the first year.
Otherwise, the PU discounts are OK, but way too high for my budget. |
Reply To Review Review in Favorites!
|
