I just watched one of the most jaw dropping gameplay footage videos I have ever seen. Bioshock: Infinite!!!
It looks to be one of the most incredible experiences. The style and emotion that is evoked within, to me, constitutes art. From Roger Ebert's journal post, to my toilet, yes they can be!
I know, everyone always quotes the definition of art, but art in and of itself is subjective. So who are we to define how something affects someone else. If a movie, which is a 2 dimensional moving picture, with sound and story can be art, why can't a game that has ALL of those previously mentioned attributes PLUS the added ability to interact with that story not be art?
I recall a piece of art created by Yoko Ono wherein a person climbed a ladder to reach the top and use a magnifying glass to see the word "yes", scrawled in small print, at its precipice. Well if we were to use Ebert's definition, then that would not be art? (Accounting for taste being a whole different topic).
As man evolves, so does his ability to craft and create using many different mediums. Sure, maybe Pac-Man isn't art or Space Invaders, but if I find political statements, interesting atmosphere and characters that make a story feel intense within Bioshock: Infinite, is that not evocative of art?