This question, posed by a newcomer to Philosophy SE was closed shortly after formulated. The same question was asked at the PHILOS-L mailing list, and it merited the following set of responses from professional philosophers (as compiled by the questioner):
A summary of responses is below. A big thank you to everyone who responded. Lots of really useful information.
Berys Gaut, A Philosophy of Cinematic Art treats video games as movies.
Dominic McIver Lopes, A Philosophy of Computer Art, esp. final chapter.
Grant Tavinor, Video Games and the Philosophy of Art.
Chris Bateman at: http://onlyagame.typepad.com/ You might have to surf around a bit to find the right articles, but he's a game designer who's also written a short book about games as art: http://www.zero-books.net/books/imaginary-games
Penny Arcade have responded to Roger Ebert (whose blog I believe started this whole question from my student), the cinema critic. Ebert argues that games are not art, while Penny Arcade... well, I think this comic says it best - http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/4/21/
Dominic McIver Lopes recently published a book on The Philosophy of Computer Art (Taylor and Francis 2009)
The Smithsonian actually has an exhibition on this very topic at the moment http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2012/games/, and: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/kidspost/smithsonian-museum-explores-the-art-of-gaming/2012/04/26/gIQAUGYsjT_story.html
TED at www.ted.com has a number of videos on the topic
Jim Sterling at www.escapistmagazine.com has covered the topic a few times
Others have questioned the exact nature of the question, does he mean playing or designing a video game? Does a musician performing a piece of music written by someone else qualify as art? Is it only art if there is an audience? Does art need to be (potentially) consumed/evaluated by another human being?
Many thanks to all those who have responded,
The wealth of information in this reply provides, I think, some evidence that the question was a bit too hastily closed. Full disclosure: I was the one who suggested the questioner that he might pose the question here, which I now regret, as it is likely that he hasn't felt much welcome.
Coming to my main point: Wouldn't it be advisable to bear with newcomers for some time and only resort to closing a first-ever question after some evidence that he or she is unable or unwilling to spell out his or her concerns in the way that SE favours?