EDIT: Because this thread is already filling up with people who didn't read the poll options properly and are making posts along the lines of "but I think video games are both fun AND art!" let me highlight this:
Video games are just for fun
I am not saying that art and fun are mutually exclusive. Notice the word "just". It specifically refers to the belief that video games are for fun only.
------
I've noticed that whenever the issue of "video games as art" comes up, generally speaking you find gamers arguing that games are art, with people who don't play video games insisting that they're not.
Now, the issue of people entering a debate when they don't actually know anything about the main subject aside, another trend I've noticed in any thread that seriously critiques a game - particularly if it critiques possibly negative aspects of the game like potentially racist or sexist content - is an outcry of people saying, "It's just a game, who cares? It's just for fun. You're not supposed to think about it seriously."
Again, these people are gamers. And it frankly astounds me that anyone would think so little of their own hobby, to insist that it's unworthy of the kind of critical analysis that films, books, painting, music or sculpture get. I mean, if you think that games are just a series of braindead blinking lights and reaction tests with no thought put into them then I guess that's OK, but if so then why would you be so invested in them as to defend them from criticism?
When video games were ruled as protected under free speech laws in the US, Justice Scalia supported the decision by comparing video games to classic literature:
"Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat. But these cultural and intellectual differences are not constitutional."
The way I see it, you can't have it both ways. You can't argue vehemently that video games are art when the issue of video game violence comes up, and then throw the "just for fun" blanket over them when someone tries to discuss their content with the same level of intellectual depth that gets applied to books and films. Unless of course you're arguing from Oscar Wilde's belief that art should never be taken seriously. But even Wilde agreed that art was deserving of a certain level of criticism:
"There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all."
So which is it? Are video games art in the same way that films and books are art? Are they sort of art, but in a lesser way than "high art" forms? Or are they not art at all?
Oh, and because I know that at least one person will come into this thread crying "censorship", I'm only going to say this once, so pay attention: Criticism and censorship are not the same thing.