|
Content
|
| Quality : |
15.0 / 20 |
| Quantity : |
15.0 / 15 |
| Entertain : |
12.0 / 15 |
| Updates : |
7.5 / 10 |
| Exclusive : |
2.5 / 05 |
| Download : |
3.5 / 05 |
| sub-total : |
55.5 / 70 |
| Navigation |
| Easy : |
7.0 / 10 |
| Features : |
2.0 / 05 |
| Design : |
1.5 / 05 |
| sub-total : |
10.5 / 20 |
| Other |
| Originality : |
3.5 / 05 |
| Hard Facts : |
3.5 / 05 |
| sub-total : |
7.0 / 10 |
Scoring Criteria New
New Update!
As of Aug 15th, 07, price of a site is no longer factored into the overall score/rank. |
|
| Editor: Duke |
Initial Review: 01-21-04 |
| Follow-Up Review(s): 11-29-04 |
|
1. Huge number of pics.
2. Young models.
1. Poor video section.
2. Avg pic quality.
"This site has got amateur pictures coming out of its ass." |
|
|
"Amateur" is easily one of the most popular niche's around. Even though lots of pornstars are hot, most guys get tired of looking at the same chicks do the same scenes over and over. It's fun to see young and natural looking chicks that haven't appeared in hundreds of porn flicks. This site is marketing themselves exactly to that amateur niche audience. In fact, on the site they claim to have "The Web's Hottest Amateurs". Yeah, right. Lofty statements like that always raise a red flag to me. My experience has been that the more bragging a site does about how amazing its content is, the more mediocre it turns out to be. Unfortunately, certain aspects of Amateur WebVirgins tend to support that rule.
Don't get me wrong, this site has a huge database of content. We're talking somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000+ pictures. And all of it is viewable in galleries and downloadable as zip files. We're not talking about a collection of links to outside content. This quantity is the best thing about WebVirgins and practically no amateur site out there can compete with that number of pictures. The pics themselves are largely a collection of hot young white chicks in softcore galleries. There is some hardcore, toy play, asian, and ebony mixed in, but to enjoy this site you'd better be into solo pics of white blondes, brunettes, and redheads. With so many pictures and their varying size and clarity it's tough to come up with an overall score on quality. Neither the pic size or sharpness overwhelmed me, but I'd say they're about average for a paysite.
The two biggest disappointments were the videos section and site design. On the videos I have four words for you: Poor Quality QuickTime Zips. I have to download zip files to watch short and grainy QT vids? No thanks. If this section was better it would really help the site in my eyes. As far as design goes, it's very basic. When you click on the gallery it switches to a simple gallery script page with a white background. The rest of the site is designed on a black background. The galleries almost gave me the feeling that I was clicking on a TGP link and taken off to a different site.
Some other extra sections are available including some webcams and real player streams. None of it will blow you away. Really this site is all about their collection of amateur pics. There's no doubt if you join you'll get your money's worth in that there's endless galleries to view. It's really in the pic quality, videos, and design where WebVirgins falls flat. Right now they're charging $24.95/mo and an expensive $9.95 3-day trial is available.
| 1st Follow-Up Review |
Review: 11-29-04 |
Except for regular content updates nothing has changed with Web Virgins. It's a site that seems to be frozen in time. With the porn internet world becoming dominated more by videos; sites like Web Virgins seem a bit dated. Having a ton of average looking pics just doesn't cut it anymore; there are too many competing sites with exclusive top quality pics and movies. Web Virgins still has downloadable QT zips as their selected format which is about as undesirable as it gets. The one selling point it can emphasize remains the large picture database of girl-next-door looking chicks.
Score increased from 72.2 to 73.0.
|
