Review Replies (4)
|
Replies to the user review above. |
| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
rearadmiral (0)
|
I haven't been a member at FTV Girls for over a year, but I definitely intend to go back soon. I agree with some of your comments that the navigation and overall feel of the site are a bit dated, and I wish it could be improved. But... the site itself is relatively simple so the limited navigation isn't as bad as it would be on a DVD site, for example. I'm more a video guy but I do download some pictures. I don't remember being disappointed in the quality of the videos or the pictures, and I see in my first review of the site that I noted the download speeds were okay. Maybe there was something slowing the speeds down for a while.
For me though, I'm a big fan of this site because of the models. The small FTV team seems to have a great eye (admittedly their taste is the same as mine) and they shoot them well too. I have almost zero interest in glamour, solo and masturbation sites, but sites like FTV Girls and ALS Scan do that so well with stunningly beautiful women that they are among my all-time favourite sites on the internet.
Two of the great things about this board are that there is a diversity of opinion, and that diversity is respected. I'll admit that I haven't been a member at FTV Girls for over a year, and I respect your opinion, but I suspect that both objectively and subjectively it deserves better than a 65 score. Please don't take offence to that, it isn't meant that way.
Not to add insult to injury, but consider giving more detail in your reviews. For both video and pictures it would be helpful to know resolutions and file sizes. That would give your readers a better understanding of what you mean.
Finally, welcome to the board. Please don't take anything I've written as a criticism because it isn't meant that way. I hope you stay around and contribute lots more. I think you'll find the board a great resource and the forum is a great place to swap information too.
|
07-26-11 09:07am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
tangub (0)
|
Welcome to PU and thanks for the review. Same as you i'm a pictures guy and i've been tempted by the models here for many years but never got around to joining because from what i've seen of their photos on TGPs or forums I get the impression the photos here are just a side show to the videos, I suppose the clue is in the title of the site First Time Video Girls. And with regional pricing making the price 35 bucks for me i just can't justify paying that for what i believe is a below par photo collection
|
07-26-11 11:37am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
mystery111 (0)
|
REPLY TO #1 - rearadmiral :
Thanks for replying to my review. I'll try and justify my score of 65. I was originally going to give it a 70, however based on PU rating definitions, my rating fits the description which I think suits my criticism; hence this site "Needs Work" and I also give it a "low recommendation." If my buddy had 32$ to spend, I'd tell him to go elsewhere. This site has to many issues.
Furthermore, I believe you misunderstood me; or rather I perhaps didn't explain it properly.. I have no issues with the quality of the camera equipment (as in megapixels). I mean the actual photo-shoot. A picture set which is engaging, with flair, which really showcases the girls. It's the photographers job to take a woman and make her a superstar. I find the photographers here lack this flair.
I didn't download one set, therefore I have nothing to comment about download speed. However, as I browse through the site (just browsing - therefore 1 click at a time, 1 photo at a time, or 1 set of thumbnails at a time), these servers are slow by today's standards. I don't want to wait 10 seconds (you heard right, sometimes it's 10 seconds) for a set of thumbnails to load. Let's not hide it, when you find a nice set you're ready to jack-off too, what a massive disappointment to have to wait for the pics to load. This is basic I would assume.
Befittingly you share the same opinion as me about the site navigation and search engine. "Needs work!" So I don't need to get into this topic.
I will however give credit when credit is due; the girls are gorgeous here. But many porn sites showcase gorgeous natural beauties. So to me, it is not enough to warrant the price considering all the issues. This brings about the issue of value.
So I think it is fitting (in my opinion) that this site "Needs work" and therefore a score in the 60's is accurate given the PU's rating definition.
I do appreciate criticism; I don't take it as negative. As long as people remain objective and non-personal, I'll respect your views opinions.
|
07-27-11 10:46pm
Reply To Message
|
4
|
rearadmiral (0)
|
REPLY TO #3 - mystery111 :
That all makes sense. Thanks for the detailed explanation. I suspect that a big part of the reason why we think differently about this site is that you prefer pictures and I prefer video. And I should point out that I usually only download the public/outdoor segments of the videos, so I guess that's me saying that the rest is a little uninspiring too.
Your explanation of the photo shoots being technically good but artistically lacking makes perfect sense to me. Whether or not a reader agrees with that assessment, it is still a valid opinion.
But, as you say, we agree on one thing: the models are stunning. Maybe my problem is I tend to be too subjective when reviewing the site and let that get in the way of some objectivity. Hmmmm... that's something for me to think about. We're all going to have a different subjective reaction to a site, but reviews are probably better staying objective.
Thanks for the reply. I look forward to reading more from you and more back-and-forth on a topic we both obviously enjoy.
|
07-28-11 03:20am
Reply To Message
|
| *Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies. |
|
