I'll probably just say what someone else said over again, but I jujst felt a need to voice myself in the discussion!
Firstly, I agree totally that it's individual and also that what claims to be art, is
art. Just the fact that this;
, is considered high/fine/whatever- art proves that point nicely.
The main difference between art and commercial art is that each piece (eg, a sprite, a song etc) is supposed to invoke a particular emotion, whereas art mostly (but not always) aims to prove a point, portray a string of thought from the artist or critisize society. Not meaning that this cannot be done in games, but mostly not in the games actual art then. As art, games are actually very versatile, since they consist of various different forms of art (2D art, 3D art, Cinematography, Music, Storytelling, Acting etc) It's kinda funny, of the four really big commercial artforms (movies, music, books & games) movies are absolutely the most stagnant one of them all.
Here in sweden there's a debate going on, where an ideal organization (I think they called themsleves Fair Play or something) wants games to be recognized as culture.
I myself consider games as an artform (to me, the
artform alongside to comics
). There's still alot of unexplored territory in games. Amusingly enough, those territories 'almost' belong to the indie-scene, since the 'big' companies doesn't have the guts
to make something weird! We need a game version of (and I quote Moe from the Simpsons) "Weird, for the sake of weird."
Let us all delve into the vast ocean of weirdness!