This argument always seems like a straw man to me. 'Art' is a broad and loosely (looser and looser) defined term, there is no reason video games can or can't be a part of that for you.
Many people seem to constantly yearn to define some sort of video game literary canon. To earn that sort of platform takes many more years and a society more willing to accept video games as valid emotional experiences and/or effective question posers. They are not ideal for either, they are ideal for producing addictive feedback loops. The author here is keen to put these loops under the same banner as Kubrick or Tolstoy, presumably to justify his investment to himself as much as anyone else.
Loving Doom is nothing to be ashamed of; you can love Tarkovsky films too.
Many people seem to constantly yearn to define some sort of video game literary canon. To earn that sort of platform takes many more years and a society more willing to accept video games as valid emotional experiences and/or effective question posers. They are not ideal for either, they are ideal for producing addictive feedback loops. The author here is keen to put these loops under the same banner as Kubrick or Tolstoy, presumably to justify his investment to himself as much as anyone else.
Loving Doom is nothing to be ashamed of; you can love Tarkovsky films too.