Tainster (0)
|
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- Very reasonable PU discount
- Beautiful models in nice clothes
- Some videos offer HD
- Some videos offer pic .zips
- Search function works okay sometimes |
| Cons: |
- Search function often can't seem to find actresses
- Oh well, because a LOT of actresses aren't named anyway
- Ads, ads, and more ads.
- Site isn't very responsive. I suspect it has a lot to do with all the ads and the 10 chat boxes that load on the side of every page.
- Ridiculous outfit choices at times. Is a woman really going to continue to wear a fancy hat or constantly fuss with a long, slinky, bothersome purse on one arm during a half hour threesome in her own home? (Very minor con in light of all the rest, though)
- Videos are all named the same thing, so you'll end up with a pile of "540p_fullcomplete" files with no idea who or what is in any of them.
- Navigation is crap. It would often send me to the main updates page (for all sites) when trying to click to the next page of a specific site's content.
- .zip files often have errors in the included/unzipped .jpgs.
- Way, WAY too much focus on the wet-and-messy fetish. |
| Bottom Line: |
A lot of the scenes on the network share content. Example: Fully Clothed Sex and Fully Clothed Pissing scenes are exactly 100% the same with the addition (subtraction, technically, since those frames are edited out in the FCS side) of urine. I'm not into that, and it's irritating to watch a scene with beautiful women glammed up in very attractive outfits and one lady's blouse is suddenly completely soaked for no reason. Well, no reason in THAT video, since it's not the urine site, but yeah, you know the actual reason and it ruins the scene. They often try to cover it up by pouring water or wasting champagne on the models, but once you realize the scenes are shared it doesn't matter. If her clothes are wet in the FCS scenes, it's urine.
Shared scenes and overall video listings for models is not representative of actual content. Take Kate Gold as an example. She has 232 scenes listed (HELL YEAH!), but only about 30 aren't party-orgy scenes. There may be some good stuff in the party scenes, but it's more trouble than it's worth to slog through the photos to see if she's actually involved or only credited because she happened to pass in front of the camera. That means I, and I suspect others, are not going to bother with the party clips (I'm not wasting my time grabbing an 800mb file for 30 seconds of an actress no matter how much I enjoy watching her work- see Rady in the scene titled "720p_fullcomplete" (haha, get it?) for a great example). Of the 30 or so remaining scenes, around half are shared overall (see previous paragraph re:urine), so she only has a dozen or so unique and possibly desirable clips out of the 200+ listed.
Siddi? 32 scenes listed, 2 unique non-party scenes.
Sindy Vega? 17 scenes listed, 3 non-party scenes.
Sweet Cat? 149 scenes listed, a dozen or so non-party scenes.
Zoe Fox? 29 scenes, but only 1 non-party scene.
It goes on and on like that.
Ads and up-sells all over the place once you're inside. Checking the box that says "skip the portal the next time I log in" is apparently meaningless and does nothing to prevent the ads from appearing the next time you log on. When you cancel your subscription a banner appears at the top telling you that you've canceled your subscription and "Please Click here we got a special offer for you." Very irritating.
It looks like their sister site "Sindrive" (very easy to find if you just remember to look for the advertisements on every page) is where they're putting the good stuff these days, along with the 4K videos. FWIW, if it were me I would've given the party-orgy clips their own $10 site and made Tainster a cheap $5 hey-let's-get-what-we-can vessel for all the other sites they advertise for.
BUT
Even after all of that, the worst part of the site is probably that all the newer content has started to be forcibly blended together into the WAM (wet and messy) niche. Parties? Everyone has something poured onto them. Lesbians using a wand massager on one another? Oil. Pornstars ostensibly at home? Urine. Then there are all the actual WAM sites, which are around half the network already. It's a shame, because the site had so much potential. They obviously even had a brief period of time when they tinkered with straponcum.com style lesbian scenes using MILFS/glam, and even had mff threesomes using the same idea, but they stopped that approach and went for large fake rubber cocks spraying ridiculous amounts of lotion out of gloryholes (?) to get the WAM element.
Bottom line: If you like attractive, well-dressed European women getting urine or lotion on their clothes, and/or if you are looking for a place that offers lots of carefree women letting strangers pour any number of things onto their nice clothes (and that's VERY much a fantasy, btw) before suddenly having sex in a dance club while none of the other patrons care orgy fantasy videos, this site is probably worth checking out.
Would I join again? Unlikely. |
Reply To Review Review in Favorites!
|
