Scoring Categories and Criteria Explained
This help page is split into two sections. The first one gives an overview of the six scoring categories and the second one expands on this with the basic criteria I follow when determining how to rate a site.
I decided to include the second part because review sites - any type really - often seem to differ quite a bit with regards to just what it takes to receive a certain score, overall or in individual scoring categories.
Some review sites are very hesitant to give out scores in the high end of their scale, but you can expect to see a significant number of 90+ scores here at Mike's Porn Site Reviews - even a fair number above 95 (but as a side note, here almost three years after I wrote the first version of this page, I can admit that the scale did unfortunately end up a bit too top heavy over time, leaving perhaps not quite enough room for differentiation in the 90+ range. Fixing it would require some major manual reworking and page updating though, so I'm afraid the finer nuances will likely continue to have to be found in the review text rather than with a quick glance at the scores).
I deliberately do my best to find the hottest, largest and most interesting sites in each review category, and if they are indeed several steps ahead of the competition and otherwise live up to the criteria listed below, I feel they deserve a high or very high score - which on this review site generally translates to 85+, although sites with somewhat lower scores could very well be worth your time and money too.
Since I don't subsribe to the notion that there's such a thing as being "perfect" (for people, things and websites alike), it also means that even a site I give a 98-100 score is in fact not created by some superior deity for the express purpose of bedazzling us mere mortals with its staggering level of perfection.
I just think it's very, very good.
Important: No site is reviewed as an isolated entity. Whether or not it is mentioned in the review, some comparison to other sites in the same category or categories will always be made.
If for instance a site is in direct competition with several others that all have huge amounts of content, it may only get a 16-18 score in Content Quantity even if it dwarfs the leading sites in some other review categories in terms of quantity.
Categories
Content Quantity (max. 20 points): The sheer number of photos, videos and other relevant content material in the member areas.
The score takes into account how much you can usually expect from the particular category (or categories) a site belongs to.
Content Quality (max. 20 points): Image and video resolution and sharpness and to a certain degree other technical aspects like lighting.
Please note that this score is very much tied to the time of the original review, as a 20/20 score in 2006 would very likely only have been perhaps a 17 or 18/20 in 2008 as quality expectations rise (HD videos, or just proper DVD resolution with a decent bitrate, were only available on a select few sites two years ago for instance, but here in 2008 they are really starting to catch on).
During a review update I may occasionally add a point or two if the video quality on a site has been improved since my original review, but at this time (Fall 2008), I haven't actually gone in and deducted points due to the aforementioned time factor
Updates (max. 10 points): How frequently is the site updated and how much new content is added?
Entertainment (max. 15 points): Probably the most subjective score although I do my very best to put myself in the shoes of the intended target group if I do not belong there already.
Did I enjoy the site and the content and do I believe it delivers what the customers are expecting in this niche? This includes taking into account whether I liked the models, both their looks (if relevant - which it usually is) and their performance, as even a technically excellent site could potentially still be pretty bland.
Navigation & Design (max. 10 points): Is the website design attractive or ugly as hell? Does it complement the content and adult niche well or does it clash with it? How easy is the site to navigate and search, locating just the videos and photosets you are looking for?
Download (max. 5 points): Does the site offer a number of different video qualities and perhaps segmented movies so both broadband and dialup users have the best options available to them? Are photosets available for easy download in a single zip file?
Value for Money (max. 15 points): A score that is to a large degree a reflection of the previous ones, held up against the membership price. Do you get your money's worth in terms of especially quantity, quality and entertainment value?
Reviewer's Tilt (max. 5 points): While an entire review by nature can never be more than one person's opinion, I do my very best to stay as objective as possible. With the reviewer's tilt score however I am able to add or subtract a few points based entirely on my own opinion of the site.
If a site is otherwise scoring high in the other categories it will most likely get a good score here as well - with the maximum of 5 generally being reserved for sites I would happily call personal favourites and 4 being the common score for sites I thoroughly enjoyed.
All the scores are added up and we end up with a total score that falls within one of the following intervals:
95+ Excellent - this is about as good as it gets, a score reserved for the very best sites
85-94 Very Good - a highly recommended site that is well worth joining
75-84 Good - should leave you quite satisfied but is lacking a bit behind the best the niche/category has to offer
65-74 Acceptable - could still be worth joining but you should probably check out other options in this category first
-64 Don't Bother - the scale originally had a few more steps in between Don't Bother and Acceptable, but quite frankly, unless we are looking at an extremely small or uncommon porn niche or sexual interest, there should be enough sites to choose from that are worth at least a 70+
Detailed Scoring Criteria
Content Quantity:
A 18-20 score will generally be rewarded to sites that have enough content to keep even very active members entertained for well past their first month of membership, and a 16-17 score is certainly not bad either.
A very rough number that would likely result in a perfect 20/20 score would be 100+ hours of video content, but less may be enough on certain types of sites.
Photo content is taken into account on a more subjective level, and usually in combination with the videos.
Content Quality:
Updated May 2008
A large number of sites - especially hardcore sites - are leaning towards heavy focus on video content these days, and in the case of these sites the Content Quality score will obviously be based mainly on this, even if the site has some photo content as well.
Technology evolves quickly, and since I started this review site in December 2005, quite a lot has happened in the quality department on many sites. In general there seems to be relatively few sites left (at least among those I choose to review) where the quality on recent video content is downright bad, and the number of sites where the quality ranges from very good to spectacular seems to be going up.
Because of this - and because the bar on "spectacular" has been raised over the last couple of years - the requirements for a 20/20 score have also gone up.
A video quality around 640x480, 800-1000 kbit was originally the minimum criterium for receiving a 20/20 score in Content Quality, and while that resolution might still cut it (720x480 is NTSC DVD resolution afterall, 640x480 is just a 4:3 format rather than 16:9 widescreen), a bitrate around 2000 kbit, meaning significantly improved image sharpness, is probably needed now for the same score.
And with a steadily increasing number of sites offering 720p (1280x720) HD videos at 4000+ kbit, another reevaluation of the 20/20 requirements might not be all that far off.
If a site is mainly centered around photo content this will of course have a much larger impact on the score than the videos (assuming there are any, but that is usually the case), and in this case I look at things like resolution as well as other aspects like lighting and setting.
With regards to the former I generally consider 1200 pixels on the long side acceptable on recent content (800 was what I originally wrote here in 2005), but resolutions significantly higher than that are no longer uncommon on some sites, typically in the babes or solo girl niches.
In terms of lighting etc., I naturally expect photos on an amateur site to look quite different from the glossy glamour photos of high profile babes, shot by a professional photographer.
Obviously the scores in this category have to be seen in connection with the date of the review, so that 20/20 score I might have handed out to a site in 2006 would perhaps only have been an 18/20 or lower here in 2008.
In most cases I do not change scores during review updates though, but merely address relevant changes and considerations in the update text.
Updates:
Most sites worth their salt update their member sections with new video and/or photo content at least once a week. Some a couple of times a week and a much smaller percentage five to seven times a week.
If a site updates once a week with a significant amount of content - typically at least 30-40 minutes of video, perhaps with photo content to go with it, I will usually give it a score in the 7-8 range.
A 10/10 score in the Updates category will generally be reserved for sites updating at least five times a week (and I do not count a full video being released in five to seven chuncks over the week as more than one update).
Entertainment:
Obviously a very important category, and also the one that is bound to get the most subjective score.
Despite the subjective nature I always do my best to take the point of view you would expect from the intended audience, even in cases where the content is of a nature I am not particularly interested in myself (although since this site is currently run by yours truly only, you can expect most of the reviewed sites to at least spark my curiosity - which extends pretty far I might add).
If I generally enjoy - or imagine the target audience will enjoy - the vast majoriy of what the site has to offer it will typically get a score in the 12-15 range.
Navigation & Design:
The actual content is of course the most important aspect of a porn site but horrible or just very bland design, and worse yet, an oversimplified navigation system and perhaps lack of search options on a large site can still lessen the enjoyment somewhat. Especially if it is frustratingly hard to find what you are looking for.
High scores will be given to sites that make it easy for their members to find their way around and quickly locate just the video or photoset they are looking for, and a nice inspiring design instead of a site that looks like a leftover from 1997 may just add an extra point or two.
Download:
A site with videos available in different qualities, and perhaps with videos split into partial files if they are large so dialup users still get a chance to download and enjoy the content will get a 4 or 5 score.
For sites with a large photo collection it will also be a plus if photosets are available in zip files.
Returning to video content, there are still sites that only offer streaming videos for viewing in your browser. I generally do not consider this acceptable anymore - I hesitate to recommend sites that do not allow their members to download videos. In the case of a site with otherwise good scores but only streaming videos you will likely be able to see the lack of downloads reflected by a 1-2 score in the Download category.
Value for Money:
A score that relies heavily on all or at least most of the others. Perfect or near perfect scores in particularly Content Quantity, Content Quality and Entertainment will most likely result in a 14-15 score in Value for Money - unless the site is more expensive than it ought to be (at the moment I consider $29.95 the acceptable "standard" price for most sites of a reasonable size - higher than that and I find myself looking at other options first, any cheaper and I may just consider it a bargain).
If a membership includes full access to other sites (not counting the bonus streaming video feeds many sites offer, although this will usually be mentioned as "3rd party plugins" in the bonus site info box) I will typically take that into account in the Value for Money score as well, but on the other hand the many sites that stand very well on their own will not suffer a lower score if no bonus content is included with the membership.
Reviewer's Tilt:
Fixed scoring criteria for this category are hard to give considering its subjective nature, but as mentioned in the overview in the first section of this page, I will generally reserve the maximum score of 5 for sites I enjoyed so much, and that made such an impact that they can be considered among my personal favourites.
A score of 4 is generally given to sites I thoroughly enjoyed, 3 a bit less and 1 or 2 scores to sites I for one reason or another just did not care much for. Assuming I have otherwise given it pretty decent scores in the other, somewhat more objective categories, you might still enjoy it a whole lot more than I did - and in case of a low Reviewer's Tilt score I will usually point out in the review text what particurly left me unsatisfied with the site.
|
|
|
95+ Excellent
85-94 Very Good
75-84 Good
65-74 Acceptable
-64 Don't Bother
Full rating info here
|
