Well by academic terms he's probably right, although I'm not ones to make truth claims so I won't say gaming can "never be art". But the way he presented it and how he gave his examples to fuel his argument, it's actually quite good. For someone I always seem to disagree with on his reviews of movies, I must say this was a well thought out and fair analysis of the game industry. Wasn't a movies are better than games argument or anything like that, but simply asserting something that if you think about, makes a lot of sense.
But as some have already stated and Ebert gets as well, even if it can't be technically called art, it doesn't bring down the value of the video game industry or development process at all. Things can be amazing and wonderful just like art in their own way, and after 12 years of playing video games I know that to be true.
