I remember a while back you could add certain cards to favorites. The defeault command was to right click on the model to bring up the menu and click on the heart. I now see that this feature was removed and replaced with a wish list function instead for preview cards. Is there any chance of bringing the favorites back? I liked that old feature because I just let the shows play and it cycles the girls randomly so it was nice to use that as a way to make certain girls or certain cards appear more frequently in the randomizer.

You're probably going to get replies to the tune of 'make a playlist of favourite cards/clips'.
But that is a bit clunky so I agree with you, it would be nice to have a 'favourites' list, or at least to try out something like this.

@Zanga

You're probably going to get replies to the tune of 'make a playlist of favourite cards/clips'.

Shame on me 😛 😎

https://www.istripper.com/forum/thread/48376/1#post723147

Du bist nicht befugt dieses Thema zu sehen oder auf mit dem Thema verwandte Daten zuzugreifen

@Stanston I rightly stand corrected 😂

You're probably going to get replies to the tune of 'make a playlist of favourite cards/clips'.

Yes you are - because that's the closest workround for the missing functionality.

But that is a bit clunky so I agree with you,

Absolutely, using a playlist is not as convenient. But it also has benefits - you can have multiple sets of favourites such "My Favourite Blondes", "My Favourite Pole Dancers" and so on. You can also provide some degree of "favouriteness" by adding some cards multiple times so that they play even more often than lower ranked favourites. You can also work at the clip level rather than the card level so you could have, for example, "My Favourite Upskrt Moments". None of these would be possible with a system that just tagged cards as being favourite or not - though of course you could envisage more complicated mechanisms.

it would be nice to have a 'favourites' list.

Yes, and it would be even nicer to be able to have multiple "favourites" lists. I would also very much like to see it integrated with the playlist system rather than being totally separated. Why have two systems that provided overlapping functionality when you can have one that provide more than the two separate systems combined.

By this I do not mean that users should have to explicitly create a "My Favourites" playlist but could designate a name for a playlist, defaulting to "My Favourites", that would be automatcally updated when using the suggested "favourites" mechanism to tag a card with a heart, but you could also then use you favourites in the same way as any other playlist.

Externally this would look just like the old favourites system. If all you want to do is have a single set of favourites you need never even know about the playlist,

Furthermore, I would envisage being able to change which playlist was used for the current "favourites" so that you could change from one to another and back again and see the "favourites" heart tags change to reflect those choices.

@TheEmu well said.

Basically functionality for what is requested is there (ie. the outcome exists) but the way to it is a bit clunky.

If it was within the system it would be (perhaps easier/streamlined) than keeping tabs on the current playlist system which is an external database the user needs to import/load.

Yes you are - because that's the closest workround for the missing functionality.

Being "The closest workaround" available doesn't mean - at all - it to be even close to the proposed function; a clunky, laborious and cumbersome playlist is not what has been requested by the OP (to whom I agree, and also will go on supporting his request for such an useful and simple function to be back).
Moreover, implementing the proposed function would not even need much time nor programmers' work - since it was already there once...

@HansSachs

The functionality is close, and can be very close indeed. You can, albeit with some effort, reproduce all of the funcionality of the old system by using the existing playlist mechanism.

You can use it to increase the frequency with which some subset of cards are played when they are being selected at random, you can use it to to display which cards you regard as favourites and you can use it to add to or remove cards from that list. The old favourites system offered no more functionality than that.

The convenience, usability or user friendliness is a different matter - one of form not of function. I think we all agree that a easy to use inteface to that functionality is highly desisable.

As an aside. I gave up using the old favourites system long before it went away. I found that once my collection grew large enough the lack of a way to either show or play only my current favourites made maintaining it more trouble than it was worth. Playlists were, for me, a more convenient way of handling this part of the functionality.

implementing the proposed function would not even need much time nor programmers' work - since it was already there once...

That is false logic. The underlying program may have changed so much that reimplementing it could be more difficult than implementing it the first time, It probably hasn't, but neither of us know that.

I gave up using the old favourites system long before it went away.

I, instead, would still need it very much. Your personal experience, anyway, can not count as a general argument about the convenience or inconvenience of the function, neither as a matter for the company about implementing it or not...

That is false logic. The underlying program may have changed so much that reimplementing it could be more difficult than implementing it the first time, It probably hasn't, but neither of us know that.

While your argument is theoretically correct, an answer to it has already be indeed given by yourself.
Neither of us can of course be sure; but I would say anyway that, in iS case, the basic program has very very probably - almost certainly - not changed so much...
I will then say that

implementing the proposed function would much probably not even need much time nor programmers' work - since it was already there once...