All movies are Art. All videogames are Art. Not all of them are created towards that purpose, but intent and quality don't factor into it. Pretentiousness isn't a quality of art - it's a quality of the artist. Godzilla was not crated to be anything more than it was, but it fundamentally changed the culture in Japan (and everywhere else), creating the kaiju genre, a thousand sequels, ten thousand clones, and it very likely the fundamental backbone of Japan's giant robot obsession (itself a fairly significant part of Japanese culture - thanks Go Nagai, ya big pervert). How can you look at how important and how inspirational something as stupid and asinine as Godzilla can be and say that it isn't Art just because it was created to entertain? Shakespeare wrote to entertain. Is Taming of the Shrew not Art?

I personally believe that it is the lowest hanging fruit that tastes the most delicious. You aren't going to change the world by making something people can only see in a gallery. For something to be Art, it must have people who appreciate it.

Can a game change the world? I think that has happened to some extent. Much like how porn ushered in the era of video recording devices, I think Space Invaders and Pac Man ushered in the computer era. There's no doubt in my mind that they wouldn't have caught on with the average consumer. Games made computers approachable to people who would otherwise never know what the hell to do with LOAD "*", 8, 1. School libraries all had computers, but they only had Oregon Trail and Robot Odyssey. What other thing in the history of man has had such a fundamental change to EVERY aspect of life and society within a thirty year span? If games even had a small part in the acceptance and propagation of technology, then they are Important.

Now, whether a single game can change the world... I don't know about that. But it can change a single person. I know that the effect they've have on my life was profound and immeasurable. Isn't that enough for something to be Art?