I've thought about this quite a lot, and I've come to the conclusion that calling games art is like calling reality art. The specific thing that distinguishes

I've thought about this quite a lot, and I've come to the conclusion that calling games art is like calling reality art. The specific thing that distinguishes video games are game mechanics. And, self contained, game mechanics are basically the physics of the game's universe. Are well implemented game mechanics art? No. Game mechanics need to be transparent, unless the game is trying to make a statement on game mechanics or something (Braid?). Video games are a nexus of things that are art, but it just doesn't seem technically okay to call the game itself art. The best thing video games have going for them is that they can be good for the imagination. The very best video games are exploratory (Myst, Shadow of the Colossus), where interaction is not inconsequential, and they use the medium to its fullest potential. However, this inspires a sort of vacant awe that really doesn't teach you more than "there are a lot of possibilities out there." Video games are basically just low-density information relays. They're like those "Baby Einstein" videos for older people. Soothing to the brain, but strengthen the wrong facilities. Like anything else, moderation is key. You need a healthy diet of books, music, movies, food, with a pinch of video games to top it off, to relax the mind from all that high density information. (Note: I am an old school gamer. These new games really do confound me, and the only game I've purchased in years was the recent Rocket Knight.)