Videogame as art

Videogame that uses the merits of the medium to convey feelings, emotions and ideas of the authors in the way only a videogame can, is true videogame art.

Games that try to rely on criteria and merits of other medium (literary or cinematic), neglecting the interactivity can't be considered a *VIDEOGAME* art.

Super Mario Bros. is art. Super Metroid is art. Unreal is art. Doom is art. Sonic the Hedgehog is art. Deus Ex is art. And many other classics - they are art as videogames. The intensity of action, the atmosphere conveyed by audio and visuals, the interactivity ov environments, the pleasure player derives from controlled movement (especially important in platformers and fighting games), and so on. These games let player experience emotions the creator wanted them to experience.
That is art. A unique form of it, something that can't be done in other mediums, because it requires player to be participant rather than observer.

If the game would not have lost anything if player became an observer, if it changed form to a movie or a novel, then it's not a good *videogame* and can't represent videogame art. Cinematic or literary art, maybe. But not game. Many "walking sims", and other highly acclaimed "art" games are guilty of this, because bad videogame critics often focus their observation on cinematic/literary merits because they don't perceive videogame merits as artistic.

That doesen't mean that a game that tells a story can't be art. It just has to tell a story in a way only videogame can. A good example of that is Outer Wilds. Interactive adventure, whose story can only work in a videogame.