The criteria could even be applied to someone who may generally be considered the archetypal artist. If he or she is asked to create a painting, but near completion is asked to make changes based on a request from an outside party, it is no longer the artist's whole vision. It has in essence become a product because someone other than the creator has influenced the end result. Does that mean we can't appreciate the subtlety or beauty found in a well-crafted game? Of course it doesn't. Just as a painting or statue can arouse debate about its aesthetic appeal, not everyone in the world will appreciate the story, characters or art design of a game like Okami.

For better or worse, videogame companies are out to do one thing and that is turn a profit. They stay in business by building a well-crafted product and then selling as many units as possible. For-profit companies must answer to shareholders. The company's executives may have a personal interest in visiting the Tate Modern, but when it comes to the videogames, sales take precedence over artistic integrity.

At the end of it all, maybe both sides can compromise and accept one inescapable fact. A beautiful painting, film, song or yes, even a videogame can touch you. All of these can elicit happiness, sorrow, fear and a whole universe of emotions that you may never have experienced before. And in the end, what is truly more important: To engage in useless debate that edifies nothing, or to find the beauty and appeal in all of these things?

For what it's worth, "art" may simply be opening your eyes to the possibility that beauty can be found in places and mediums that you never expected.