|
Content
|
| Quality : |
16.0 / 20 |
| Quantity : |
10.5 / 15 |
| Entertain : |
12.5 / 15 |
| Updates : |
7.0 / 10 |
| Exclusive : |
5.0 / 05 |
| Download : |
2.5 / 05 |
| sub-total : |
53.5 / 70 |
| Navigation |
| Easy : |
8.0 / 10 |
| Features : |
2.5 / 05 |
| Design : |
3.0 / 05 |
| sub-total : |
13.5 / 20 |
| Other |
| Originality : |
3.0 / 05 |
| Hard Facts : |
3.0 / 05 |
| sub-total : |
6.0 / 10 |
Scoring Criteria
|
|
| Editor: Vanessa |
Initial Review: 01-04-08 |
|
1. Lengthy content descriptions.
2. Exclusive amateur content.
1. No clear update schedule or date stamps.
2. User features and download options are minimal.
3. Video quality needs improvement.
4. Image size could be larger.
"Some easy changes would really help give this gay amateur site a boost." |
|
|
I've never heard of Dixter before, but one quick look and it's clear that this is a softcore/hardcore gay site featuring some super sexy studs. They promise hot amateur guys in solo and hardcore action; although lack of date stamps and a clear update schedule leaves me a little disappointed right off the cuff. Overall though, this is a simple and straightforward content site featuring exclusive models, all with photos and videos for $21.95 per month.
The Good:
- Currently there are more than 38+ sets of men engaged in solo and hardcore sex. Each model is listed (sometimes more than once) along with a set of screen shots, a lengthy description/bio, along with all photo & video shoots taken. Most of the men are buff 20-30 something’s, super sexy to look at and obviously really enjoy themselves naked and with other men. Most dudes go solo, but there are at least 6+ sets that offer some great fucking.
- Image sets that come along with each shoot are a nice addition to the videos and good quality, although I wish they were larger in size.
- Videos are offered in high or low quality as full-length clips. The highest bitrate is only about 700k, although the picture quality looked quite nice, considering.
The Bad:
- So far there isn't a whole lot of content here yet, and no clear update schedule or date stamps on the content leaves member's at a total loss as to when they can expect to see something new added.
- Image size could be larger and video quality could be much higher for both the low and high bandwidth options. Their high bandwidth should be their low, and the high quality offering should go as high as 1500k or better.
- Download and user options are minimal. Dixter is a very simple site, almost too simple, and doesn't offer zip files for the image sets or navigational features to browse the content by model type or action.
The Conclusion:
The overall premise to Dixter is a good one, but the current member's area is flawed in too many ways to make buying a membership worthwhile. The first issue to address would be the lack of a clear update schedule. Secondly, Dixter really needs to start offering their high bandwidth downloads in true high bandwidth bitrates. The price of admission is a reasonable one, but not for a site with so little content and a ways to go in terms of user features and quality.
|
