Hello, not to purposely go against everyone else, I'd like to say 'No', In my opinion a computer game cannot be a work of art.
These are my reasons:
I consider a work of art to be greater than the sum of it's parts. For example the Mona Lisa is an oil painting of a woman, it is more than JUST layers of oil paint on a canvas. However there are many many examples of pieces which are equally oil paintings of women in oil on canvas which are not 'works of art' - in my opinion. The difference being not of tacit bracketting but of quality. We are inundated by hobby painters/drawers/ fans of TV and video 'how to' programmes which can 'teach' how to paint flowers in watercolours etc. These works are not art, (and why should we belittle that tiny word) - These works are not Art, they are the reduced sediment of over exercised stylisation which has mastered the 'look' of art without any of it's immenance/soul/gravitas.
A video game takes you on one predestined route. Nothing within it's structure is left to chance, no subconscious aspect of the artist remains tacit to invoke content beyond mere appearance. In art we lose ourselves to discover a space/being intuitively, returning to our own outlook of life enrichened with a slightly different perspective, can you define everything which defines you and your own perspective? No, it would be reductive, meagre!
I was onced asked why I don't draw from photographs, only from life... it's the same as sex, which is better, masturbating over porn or having real sex?
Check out Jean Baudrillard 'Simulacra and Simulation' and 'the Transparency of Evil'.
:)