Games not that Special After All?

So a person over at the Escapist (to me, it's just the editor lady, Russ Pitts, the guy who made Paranoia, and all the other contributing peeps) just said that games shouldn't really be viewed as art but rather for how well it makes money. Or something vaguely like that.

I'm going to say duh.

Because where else is anything made for consumers considered a success for it's "artiness?"

Just paintings. And even then, I'd be willing to bet that the common man would never have appreciated something like Picasso without first hearing the prices his works have commanded.

So really, are games any different from any other medium? Sure they're interactive, but they still "works of art" (meant to be read as "human" from the phrase, "but they're still just human."). They're bought, reviewed, enjoyed. Even though it's a different experience, it's not really a different thing.

Well, that concludes my misguided ramblings on something. I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere.

And here's a link to the original Article. Be sure to pay my respects to the writer of it for me.