So I don't have a habit of playing terrible games, but I can say the worst games I've played are sneaky. They trick you into thinking they might have something going for them, only to never go anywhere or get better.
Husk is the first one that jumps out at me. It announces itself as a silent hill inspired horror game based on domestic violence themes. After three hours of painfully slow controls and enemies that don't make any sense to the story, it just suddenly ends with a cliche, tacked on, "you're the asshole here" monologed conclusion with no explanations whatsoever.
Another category of absolute butt-trash I've fallen for is games that appeal to edgy teenagers, and so have stellar reviews regardless of how they in fact suck shit.
Lust for darkness is a prime example. It's a horror game with nothing remotely scary in it about a sex cult full of people with British accents in America who refer to themselves as cult members, and whose outrageous taboo sex acts are really just regular shit but they wear masks. It's like a wet dream fantasy for a 13 year old incel. It's not scary, it's not clever, it's not even just porn, and it's most of all not fun.
A game that fits in both of these categories, that I played to completion just hoping I'd click with whatever coolaid the reviewers drank, was The Cat Lady. Reviews made it sound so deep and emotional, and it seemed like it was going somewhere for a minute, but at the end, it was just a cringefest hidden object sidescroller with weird voice acting that was targeted at angsty children who romantisize depression and death.
Years after leaving my negative steam reviews I still catch flak on occasion from superfans of these dogshit time sinks who have never read a book in their lives.
I have a 1600s Turkish rebel sword and scabbard with a pommel carved into a rooster head. I picked it up at a curio shop that was closing a few years ago and while I did some basic dating on it to make sure it's not a reproduction, I really donot know much about it.
I have several fossils that are perticularly unique, but I've never seen that kind of thing on the show, so I don't know if it would be worth it.
An antique shop had a four barrel pepperbox revolver from the 1860s that was sold as a non functioning novelty, and I cleaned it up and actually got it working again. I'd be interested if it has any value higher that the 150 it cost me.
Last option is a buffet, library table, dresser, and side table my great great grandparents got as a wedding gift. They're made of tiger oak, stained in pitch and very heavy. They were locally made, and I've bumped into several pieces that are very similar, but they're always falling apart. The set I have has never been out of use, and never needed repairs. The mirror on the buffet still has it's original silver. The manufacturing stamp on the back says the guys name, the city, and 1904.
In the 1800s absolutely, but since the discontinuation of leaded products, significantly heavy glass with tin, aluminum, titanium or other metals added for strength and sheen has been deemed crystal, with the previous material being designated as leaded crystal.
I'm an avid antique collector and have needed to know the difference for several years.
If you reside in the EU or Britain however, disregard those statements, as they still have legal definitions of crystal on the books.
Edit: I meant UK, not EU, my bad.
Edit again: it is actually the EU. American schools, man.
It was pretty clever to use a spray bottle to add condensation to the inside of the bottle. I would of gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you pesky lemmings.
SadSadSatellite @ SadSadSatellite @lemmy.dbzer0.com Posts 3Comments 219Joined 2 yr. ago
I would've been with you until I saw Grumper Pig.