There is a line between drug and entertainment which wasnt obvious to the notion made about art.
Measuring art against other things also has the similar shadowside that it misses the point.
Videogames can not do everything done in other art, nor is it a final answer.
And while a fantastically valid point for those who hasnt experienced it, also not making the finer points of games an artform (for me that appreciates it as such.)
It sort of meddled everything together as if they were all football teams. And to make the point again, football is good at being football,
there is an artistic side to it, but some values exist in a range of options. I want my art to be that full range, whatever it may be.
Maybe it should be unappreciated videogames vs. other appreciated and acknowledged forms of art. I think some people need and could benefit from opening their eyes to both issues raised therein. Videogames are great fun, and a lot of art and craftwork goes into their making.
Some are made to mimic drugs, and some are masterpieces. As gamers i think its unfair to creators to call both games. A game is a game, and an antisocial-drug is something else, however many shares, likes and constantly monitored and logged mandated online multiplayer modes it has.
To a large degree micropayments, artificial paid extra content and ingame shenanigans is also contrary to art for me.