They say you can find anything you’re looking for on the internet. As the days go by this seems more and more true. I never would have thought I’d be able to log online and play video games against hot girls in an instant, but it turns out I can do just that.

As Jeff mentioned in an earlier post, social sites are popping up to give gamers a chance to play their favorite games against hot young ladies. The latest site to join the industry is PlayWithMe.com. It has a variety of games and ladies set to team up against you. The system is simple. You buy credits and choose your lady and then challenge her to a game. The site has a selection of Flash games, but it’s also possible to play console games against the girl of your choice.

Your best bet is probably choosing a flash game. You are there for a little female company, right? Flash games give you the best chance to chat up the ladies and won’t require as much focus on your play.

Like I said earlier, anything can be found on the internet. If you’ve got money burning a hole in your pocket and an eye for a hot gamer, PlayWithMe is out there. Just remember, the more you play, the more you pay.

You may recall an article by Roger Ebert this past April in which he claimed video games could never be art. The question has become sort of synonymous with the collision of tech and culture, and it serves as a rallying cry for people trying to justify their gaming addictions. The big problem with Ebert’s stance, though, is that he’s not a gamer. The New Scientist wanted the perspective of people who actually game, but who are still well respected in intellectual circles. The responses the magazine was able to elicit are disappointing, mostly mundane sidesteps of a question that I think people should take a harder stance on.

Here’s what Nick Montfort, a professor of digital media at MIT, had to say:

People tend to mean several things by this question. First, can video games be sold by art dealers, appear in galleries and museums and be an accepted part of the art world? They already are: just look at the creations of Cory Archangel, Mark Essen and Eddo Stern. Second, can video games tackle difficult issues and sensitively present us with different perspectives? They already have: see the work of Terry Cavanaugh, Jason Rohrer, Molleindustria and Tale of Tales, and commercial games such as Bully (also called Canis Canem Edit) and Indigo Prophecy (Fahrenheit). Finally, can video games present an experience of aesthetic beauty that is particular to the medium? Indeed they do: see Tetsuya Mizuguchi’s Rez, a game dedicated to Kandinsky and which I first discovered and played in the Museum of the Moving Image in Queens, New York. It’s a great time for those interested in this question to see what work is already out there.

I think he gives the best response of the bunch, but he gives it in that snide, I-know-things-that-you-don’t kind of way. Those are the questions people are asking, but why do we want the answers? To justify the amount of time that gets dumped into games and gaming?

I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that gaming is a less thoughtful narrative medium that the others we have available to us. Very few games that get made are telling an interesting story or challenging the player’s view of the world in any significant way, likely far fewer of them than books or movies. Games, for the most part, aren’t being designed with story in mind. They are designed directly for a consumer, and they come out of a booming business. If you’ve ever heard the saying “art from adversity” then you know what I’m getting at here. It’s not difficult to throw billions of dollars at a project and market it to expectant masses. There is no struggle, other than the struggle to meet artificial deadlines so you can hopefully keep your job at a top developer instead of packing up and moving your office ten or fifteen miles to the closest competitor. For the most part, video game design is a pretty cushy environment, so it becomes less and less likely as the world gets more and more enchanted by gaming that we will see Sophie’s Choice from someone like Activision.

It’s entirely possible that smaller development houses are turning out some good stuff, but I can’t honestly say that I believe development will reach a point that the smallest, most artistically minded pieces of work will be discernible from the crap like that Columbine game. That game has likely been the most contentious where the art debate is concerned, and I think it’s a good example of why games aren’t art now, and why they might never be. As much as that game wants to be a social commentary, wants to draw the audience in to what the Columbine shooters were feeling, it’s still a game, which is where games will fall short. As long as there is an objective to be met, a quota to reach, a number of infiltrators to be dispatched, games will be no more than a skinner box with an overpriced script, providing gamers with the thrill of objective completion instead of the challenge of a real story. That’s not a slight against games, it’s just the nature of interactive fiction. As soon as the reader has to be pandered to, has to be asked what decision to make, the story has been compromised by the intent of the audience. That’s not what art is about. It’s not about trying to please a viewer, trying to appeal to the artist’s desired protagonist. It is about creating something with which we can can resonate, something that makes us feel about the world that which we may never have felt on our own. The moment a game provides the player a choice, that decision is gone, lost in a player’s desire to “win” the game, to beat the system. Granted, that may change over time, but for now, games can’t be art, because games are designed to be beaten or, even worse, to siphon money out of the consumer. That’s not art. That’s as far from art as we can possibly get.

I don’t know if you’ve seen the trailer for Lionsgate’s upcoming Kick-Ass but it looks funny in that quirky, charming, kid-movie kind of way. We decided to put together a list of this year’s gadgets that will also kick some serious ass and put it up on our parent site, Bullz-Eye. The best part about the list is the fact that it does not include the iPad. Yes, Apple haters, if you want to enjoy a gadget list for the upcoming year without the world’s flavor of the month, this is your chance.

I tried to cover a wide range of products so everyone could have something to love. Obviously Project Natal and Playstation Move are the big video game releases for the year, and though I didn’t use the iPad, the iPhone 4 is on there (sorry guys, iPhone OS 4 looks great). I’m also looking forward to the nPower PEG and MagicJack’s upcoming femtocell. On the whole, it’s going to be a pretty solid year for gadget geeks.

There’s a new “social networking” service aimed at male gamers. When you’re feeling lonely or would just like to hear a woman’s voice on the other end of that headset you can pay for that special touch at Game Crush. The site offers pay per session interactions with attractive female gamers. You can play anything from console shooters like MW2 to a casual Flash game – just keep those hands visible, friend.

The site launched today and is already down from the amount of traffic it received. That’s probably not interested gamers as much as it is people curious about what this sort of thing looks like. My guess? A train wreck. If anything, I hate to think of the things the poor girls working for this will be subjected to.

Interested gamers can pay $8.25 for 500 credits, which the company says is about the price of buying a girl a drink. Not if you’re buying her PBR. That’s right, we keep it classy. Each session runs 400 credits, after which you can leave a 100 credit tip. Those sessions will typically last 10-12 minutes, less if you’re playing a Flash game. It’s a pretty stiff way to enjoy the company of a lady, but I guess getting your ass whooped in some Halo by a hot chick might fulfill someone’s wildest fantasy.

I remember having lots of fun playing Bingo. When I was a young girl, we played it in school when it was too wet for our class to go outside for recess. My family had a game that we’d play at home, when my Mother could get all of us kids to sit down long enough. Our local school’s PTA often held bingo games as fundraisers. The local Lions, Elks and other such clubs still have a couple of bingo nights at their lodges. Still, as a game, it seems to have fallen out of fashion everywhere except on the web.

Playing bingo and other games of chance on the web is a trend that seems to be constantly growing in popularity. Many of the game-based websites offer free on-line play, or you can register with them to play for money or other prizes. Online bingo lacks the fun of a game held in a room full of people frantically trying to get those tiles in a nice neat row, so they can yell “bingo” at the top of their lungs. Still, it is easy to access and very convenient. You can play at almost any time of the day and from the privacy of your home on sites like Caesars online.

I may be waxing a bit nostalgic, but I would really like to see bingo become more popular as a pastime that is undertaken in person. Oh, I could go to the local Elk’s game, but they usually offer it on a night that is inconvenient for me. So, I guess what I’d like to see is the game become part of our culture once again, whether or not you play for money. It was fun and competitive, but based entirely upon luck, so that those of us without any particular skill still had a chance of winning.